RADER v. ALLY FINANCIAL INC (2020)

[Unpublished]

Larry Rader appeals after the district court ¹ dismissed his case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude that Rader failed to establish either diversity or federal question jurisdiction. See Midland Psychiatric Assocs. v. United States, 145 F.3d 1000, 1002 (8th Cir. 1998) (reviewing the dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction de novo). Additionally, we find no merit to Rader's argument that the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion to compel. See Toben v. Bridgestone Retail Operations, LLC, 751 F.3d 888, 895 (8th Cir. 2014) (stating that district courts have wide discretion in handling discovery matters). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The Honorable Nancy E. Brasel, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Tony N. Leung, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.

PER CURIAM.