Page:Olcott v. Delaware Flood Co.pdf/12

 sanction.”);, 132 F.3d 152, 156-57 (3d Cir. 1997) (same). , 102 F.3d 429, 431 (9th Cir. 1996) (default judgment imposed as discovery sanction is enforceable even if it is later determined the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction). If a case or controversy is properly before the federal courts, however, Article III's restriction on federal courts' subject matter jurisdiction is not implicated., 503 U.S. 131, 132 (1992) (discussing Article III-based limits on court's ability to impose sanctions where court  had subject matter jurisdiction).

Plaintiff's complaint asserted federal securities act claims and pendant state law claims. The district court had original subject matter jurisdiction over the federal claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and over the state claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a). Dismissal of a properly pled federal claim does not retroactively deprive the court of subject matter jurisdiction. See Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678, 682 (1946) (federal -12-