Against the backdrop of this Court's most recent guidance set forth in Weyerhaeuser Co., — where the Court held, to wit: "The Administrative Procedure Act creates a basic presumption of judicial review *** [for] one suffering legal wrong because of agency action", citing Abbott Laboratories and quoting 5 U.S.C. § 702, in both matters the Court relied on the language set forth in Section 10 of the Administrative Procedure Act: "Any person suffering legal wrong because of any agency action, or adversely affected or aggrieved by such action within the meaning of any relevant statute, shall be entitled to judicial review thereof " — pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331; § 1391(b); § 1651(a); § 1361; and § 2201 - did the U.S. District Court err when it, notwithstanding the clarity of the foregoing, dismissed, sua sponte, (before the defendant agency answered the complaint presented), proffering that U.S. District Court[s] lack jurisdiction to judicially review decisions *** of agencies not statutorily exempt from judicial review *** under the explicit mandates set forth in 5 U.S.C., § 701; § 702; § 703; § 704; § 705; and § 706?

Whether the U.S. District Court erred in dismissing, sua sponte, the complaint seeking judicial review of agency action under the Administrative Procedure Act