Kent Lehman v. DCO Pacific City LLC

Opinion

Case 8:23-cv-00162-JLS-AGR Document 5 Filed 02/03/23 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:15 JS-6 ____________________________________________________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No.: 8:23-cv-00162-JLS-AGR Date: February 03, 2023 Title: Kent Lehman v. DCO Pacific City LLC

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

V. R. Vallery N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANT: Not Present Not Present

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

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). “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). As the party invoking federal jurisdiction, the plaintiff has the burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994). At the pleading stage, the burden must be met by pleading “a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction . . . .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(1)(1).

Subject matter jurisdiction exists when an action arises under federal law or when there is complete diversity between the parties and the matter in controversy exceeds $75,000. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331–32. Diversity jurisdiction arises where the controversy is between “citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state.” 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(2).

Here, Plaintiff’s form Complaint states no basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction—there are only blank lines under the JURISDICTION heading. (See Compl. at 1, Doc. 1.) Furthermore, Plaintiff brings a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress, which is a cause of action arising under state—not federal—law. (See id. at 3.) Therefore, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s claim. _____________________________________________________________________________ CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL 1 Case 8:23-cv-00162-JLS-AGR Document 5 Filed 02/03/23 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:16 ____________________________________________________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No.: 8:23-cv-00162-JLS-AGR Date: February 03, 2023 Title: Kent Lehman v. DCO Pacific City LLC

Accordingly, this matter is DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling in a proper court.

Initials of Deputy Clerk: vrv

_____________________________________________________________________________ CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL 2