Court records
- Format
- Set
- Court Records
- Text
- Searchable
Text as released
Machine-read from the scan. Names, dates and numbers can be misread — check anything you rely on against the original page.
Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 6-2 Filed 07/11/19 Page 1 of 15
EXHIBIT 2
Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document
Document 205-2 6-2 onFiled
Entered FLSD 07/11/19 Page 2 of 15
Docket 07/05/2013 Page 2 of 20
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON
JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2,
Petitioners,
vs.
UNITED STATES,
Respondent.
_______________________________/
UNITED STATES’ SEALED MOTION TO DISMISS
FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
The United States hereby requests that this Court enter an order dismissing these
proceedings and the Petition for Enforcement of Crime Victim’s Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. Section
3771 (DE 1, the “Petition”), through which Petitioners Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 have
advanced claims pursuant to the Crime Victims’ Rights Act (“CVRA”), for lack of subject
matter jurisdiction.1 This Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the Petition because
1
See, e.g., Grupo Dataflux v. Atlas Global Group, L.P., 541 U.S. 567, 571 (2004)
(“Challenges to subject-matter jurisdiction can of course be raised at any time prior to final
judgment.”); United States v. Giraldo-Prado, 150 F.3d 1328, 1329 (11th Cir. 1998) (recognizing
that “a party may raise jurisdiction at any time during the pendency of the proceedings”); Harrell
& Sumner Contracting Co. v. Peabody Petersen Co., 546 F.2d 1227, 1229 (5th Cir. 1977)
(“[U]nder Rule 12(h)(3), Fed.R.Civ.P., the defense of lack of subject matter jurisdiction may be
[…]