IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 98-30676
Conference Calendar
__________________
MILDRED BARROIS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
GOUX ENTERPRISES, INC., doing business as
Pontchartrain Health Centre,
Defendant-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 98-CV-175-D
- - - - - - - - - -
April 19, 1999
Before JONES, SMITH, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Mildred Barrois appeals the district court’s sua sponte
dismissal of her complaint for lack of subject-matter
jurisdiction. Barrois, a Louisiana citizen, alleged that Goux
Enterprises, which operated a nursing home in Mandeville, La.,
mistreated her since-deceased husband, Victor, while he resided
at the nursing home and that Goux “blocked” her application to
the Social Security Administration to become Victor’s
“representative payee.” The district court did not err in
holding that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over Barrois’s
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
No. 98-30676
-2-
claims. See FED. R. CIV. P. 12(h)(3). Inasmuch as she was
raising a claim regarding Social Security benefits, Barrois did
not invoke the federal-question jurisdiction of the district
court because she failed to demonstrate that she had exhausted
administrative remedies provided the Social Security
Administration. See Paul v. Shalala, 29 F.3d 208, 210 (5th Cir.
1994). Moreover, Barrois has not invoked the diversity
jurisdiction of the court because she has failed to sustain her
burden of proving that complete diversity exists. See Getty Oil
Corp., Div. of Texaco, Inc. v. Insurance Co. of North Am., 841
F.2d 1254, 1258-59 (5th Cir. 1988); 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
Because this appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See 5th
Cir. R. 42.2. This is Barrois’ second frivolous lawsuit and
appeal involving the same subject matter. Accordingly, we
caution Barrois that any further suits or appeals involving these
matters will result in sanctions.
APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.