Filed: Jul. 23, 2018
Latest Update: Jul. 23, 2018
Summary: ORDER SUA SPONTE DISMISSING CASE FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION GONZALO P. CURIEL , District Judge . On July 11, 2018, the Court issued an order to show cause why the case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (Dkt. No. 45.) On July 20, 2018, Plaintiff filed a response agreeing with the Court's analysis and does not object to the dismissal of this case without prejudice. (Dkt. No. 47.) As stated in the order to show cause, the federal court is one of lim
Summary: ORDER SUA SPONTE DISMISSING CASE FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION GONZALO P. CURIEL , District Judge . On July 11, 2018, the Court issued an order to show cause why the case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (Dkt. No. 45.) On July 20, 2018, Plaintiff filed a response agreeing with the Court's analysis and does not object to the dismissal of this case without prejudice. (Dkt. No. 47.) As stated in the order to show cause, the federal court is one of limi..
More
ORDER SUA SPONTE DISMISSING CASE FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
GONZALO P. CURIEL, District Judge.
On July 11, 2018, the Court issued an order to show cause why the case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (Dkt. No. 45.) On July 20, 2018, Plaintiff filed a response agreeing with the Court's analysis and does not object to the dismissal of this case without prejudice. (Dkt. No. 47.)
As stated in the order to show cause, the federal court is one of limited jurisdiction, Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America, 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994), and the Court is constitutionally required to raise issues related to federal subject matter jurisdiction, and may do so sua sponte. Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env't, 523 U.S. 83, 93B94 (1998); see Nevada v. Bank of America Corp., 672 F.3d 661, 673 (9th Cir. 2012) (it is well established that "a court may raise the question of subject matter jurisdiction, sua sponte, at any time during the pendency of the action, even on appeal.") "If the court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action." Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).
Here, Plaintiff agrees there is no basis for subject matter jurisdiction based on complete diversity of the parties as alleged in the Complaint. Accordingly, the Court sua sponte DISMISSES without prejudice the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
