¶1Stella C. Davis, Chicago, 111., for appellant.
¶2Edward V. Hanrahan, U. S. Atty., John Peter Lulinski, John Powers Crowley, Thomas W. James, Gilbert Drucker, Asst. U. S. Attys., Chicago, 111., for appellees.
¶3Before DUFFY, ENOCH and EILEY, Circuit Judges.
¶5Plaintiff appeared in the District Court and here, pro se. She has commenced and conducted much litigation in the federal and state courts, asserting various claims of fraud, conspiracy, legal chicanery, etc. See Davis v. Foreman, 7 Cir., 239 F.2d 579; Davis v. Foreman, 7 Cir., 251 F.2d 421; Daviditis v. National Bank of Mattoon, 7 Cir., 251 F.2d 299, and Daviditis v. National Bank of Mattoon, 7 Cir., 262 F.2d 884.
¶6In the instant case, the District Court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, and that the complaint filed failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. We think the District Court was correct.
¶7Affirmed.