Barbara Ann Kelly appeals the district courts judgment awarding attorneys fees to Seaside Community Development Corporation. She challenges the courts determination of her citizenship for diversity jurisdiction purposes and its award of sanctions to Seaside based on Kellys lying about her state citizenship. We affirm in all respects for the reasons explained by the district court. See Doc. 362; Doc. 368; Doc. 406. Kellys contentions and arguments, including any not addressed by the district court, are so lacking in merit that they do not warrant or deserve any discussion. See, e.g., United States v. Iriele, 977 F.3d 1155, 1165 n.6 (11th Cir. 2020). By all appearances Kelly has disrespected and abused the legal system at every stage of this decade-long litigation, and we decline to continue indulging her waste of judicial resources.
Kellys appeal may well be frivolous and deserving of additional sanctions and an award to Seaside of “just damages” and “double costs,” see Fed. R. App. P. 38, but to avoid spending even more judicial resources we will not order her to show cause why she should not be sanctioned. At least, we will not do that yet. Further efforts to challenge the district courts rulings, and this Courts judgment, may not be met with similar leniency. See generally, e.g., United States v. Morse, 532 F.3d 1130, 1133 (11th Cir. 2008) (sanctioning a pro se litigant and reasoning that “[b]ecause [his] arguments are frivolous and he had been warned about raising them, we conclude that [Rule 38] sanctions are appropriate”); see also Kelly v. Davis, 679 F. Appx 978 (11th Cir. 2017) (unpublished) (noting in Kellys last appeal that her “lawsuit in this case borders on frivolous, if it does not cross that border”).
The district courts judgment is AFFIRMED, and all pending motions are DENIED.
PER CURIAM: