Sara Gonzalez Flavell v. International Bank for Reconstruction and Development

Federal courts are ones of limited jurisdiction. In February 2020 Petitioner brought complaint in D.C. Superior Court against IBRD for D.C. law violations. IBRD removed the case to federal court, next moving to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. Petitioner moved to remand. On March 25, 2021 the district court, stating it acted without removal jurisdiction, denied both motions, retaining Petitioner’s action without filings or remedy, effectively disposing of the state law case. It next refused to certify an interlocutory appeal. Petitioner approached the court of appeals for extraordinary writ, noting the district court’s order is void for lack of jurisdiction, abuse of lawful authority and abuse of discretion, and violation of her Constitutional right to procedural due process. The court of appeals denied the petition stating the district court may determine removal jurisdiction based on later filings on unconnected grounds. Certiorari is sought because the lower two courts’ failure to follow the law here undermines the bedrock core principle of the judicial system, jurisdictional limits, frustrating Congress’s determination and their own purpose, creating new legal rights by exercising judicial authority they lack. These courts’ also ignore existing federal caselaw and their own prior consistent decisions. The questions presented are: 1. Whether a writ of certiorari is appropriate because, contrary to the denial of mandamus and