Ing. Dipl.-lng (FH) Elhar Muminovic v. Blizzard Entertainment, Inc.

C.D. California

Ing. Dipl.-lng (FH) Elhar Muminovic v. Blizzard Entertainment, Inc.

DecidedJanuary 9, 2023

Docket8:22-cv-01669

StatusUnknown

This text of Ing. Dipl.-lng (FH) Elhar Muminovic v. Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. (Ing. Dipl.-lng (FH) Elhar Muminovic v. Blizzard Entertainment, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, C.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ing. Dipl.-lng (FH) Elhar Muminovic v. Blizzard Entertainment, Inc., (C.D. Cal. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

Case 8:22-cv-01669-FWS-ADS Document 15 Filed 01/09/23 Page1lofi1 Page ID #:39 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JS-6 CIVIL MINUTES — GENERAL

Case No. SACV 22-01669-FWS (ADSx) Date January 9, 2023 Title Ing. Dipl.-Ing (FH) Elhar Muminovic v. Blizzard Entertainment, Inc.

PRESENT: HONORABLE FRED W. SLAUGHTER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Melissa H. Kunig Not Reported Deputy Clerk Court Reporter ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANT: None Present None Present PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE COURT’S ORDER

On November 9, 2022, the court ordered Plaintiff to show cause in writing why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction (“Order to Show Cause”). (See Dkt. 14.) The record reflects Plaintiff has not filed any response to the Order to Show Cause. (See generally Dkt.) Thus, for the reasons discussed in the court’s previous order, (see Dkt. 14), the court concludes Plaintiffs Complaint fails to demonstrate an adequate basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction and the action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3)(“If the court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action.”); Scholastic Ent., Inc. v. Fox Ent. Grp., Inc., 336 F.3d 982, 985 (9th Cir. 2003) (“While a party is entitled to notice and an opportunity to respond when a court contemplates dismissing a claim on the merits . . . it is not so when the dismissal is for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”); Ca/. Diversified Promotions, Inc. v. Musick, 505 F.2d 278, 280 (9th Cir. 1974) (“It has long been held that a judge can dismiss sua sponte for lack of jurisdiction.”).

Initials of Deputy Clerk = mku CC:

CV-90 (06/04) CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Page 1 of 1

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Case 8:22-cv-01669-FWS-ADS Document 15 Filed 01/09/23 Page1lofi1 Page ID #:39 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JS-6 CIVIL MINUTES — GENERAL

Case No. SACV 22-01669-FWS (ADSx) Date January 9, 2023 Title Ing. Dipl.-Ing (FH) Elhar Muminovic v. Blizzard Entertainment, Inc.

PRESENT: HONORABLE FRED W. SLAUGHTER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Melissa H. Kunig Not Reported Deputy Clerk Court Reporter ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANT: None Present None Present PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE COURT’S ORDER

On November 9, 2022, the court ordered Plaintiff to show cause in writing why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction (“Order to Show Cause”). (See Dkt. 14.) The record reflects Plaintiff has not filed any response to the Order to Show Cause. (See generally Dkt.) Thus, for the reasons discussed in the court’s previous order, (see Dkt. 14), the court concludes Plaintiffs Complaint fails to demonstrate an adequate basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction and the action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3)(“If the court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action.”); Scholastic Ent., Inc. v. Fox Ent. Grp., Inc., 336 F.3d 982, 985 (9th Cir. 2003) (“While a party is entitled to notice and an opportunity to respond when a court contemplates dismissing a claim on the merits . . . it is not so when the dismissal is for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”); Ca/. Diversified Promotions, Inc. v. Musick, 505 F.2d 278, 280 (9th Cir. 1974) (“It has long been held that a judge can dismiss sua sponte for lack of jurisdiction.”).

Initials of Deputy Clerk = mku CC:

CV-90 (06/04) CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Page 1 of 1

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Ing. Dipl.-lng (FH) Elhar Muminovic v. Blizzard Entertainment, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ing-dipl-lng-fh-elhar-muminovic-v-blizzard-entertainment-inc-cacd-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack