Iradj Forootan v. Smart Disaster Response Technologies, Inc.

Opinion

__________________________________________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No.: SACV 20-00146-JLS (DFMx) Date: December 16, 2020 Title: Iradj Forootan v. Smart Disaster Response Technologies, Inc. et al

Present: HONORABLE JOSEPHINE L. STATON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Melissa Kunig N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff: Attorneys Present for Defendant:

Not Present Not Present

Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER VACATING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE AND ORDERING PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CASE WHY THIS MATTER SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

It appears that this Court may lack subject matter jurisdiction over this action. The Court may raise the issue of subject matter jurisdiction at any time, sua sponte. See U.S. Catholic Conference v. Abortion Rights Mobilization, 487 U.S. 72, 79 (1988). As the party invoking federal jurisdiction, Plaintiff has the burden of establishing the existence of subject matter jurisdiction. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994). At the pleading stage, the burden is met by pleading “a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction . . . .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(1). Here, the Plaintiff’s Complaint appears to rely on federal question jurisdiction, but no federal question is apparent from the Complaint. No later than December 22, 2020, plaintiff is ordered to show cause in writing why this matter should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Failure to respond by the above date will result in the immediate dismissal of this case. The Scheduling Conference is vacated and, if the Court discharges the OSC, it will set a schedule based on the Joint 26(f) Report on file.

Initials of Deputy Clerk: mku