Michael Weiss v. Peggy Pei Lin

Opinion

Case 8:20-cv-00972-CBM-ADS Document 62 Filed 02/09/22 Pagelof1 Page ID #:1760

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. CV 20-972-CBM-ADS(x) Date February 9, 2022

Title Weiss v. Pei-Lin et al. reer reer rere reer reece Present: The Honorable ©CONSUELO B. MARSHALL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE YOLANDA SKIPPER NOT REPORTED Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff: Attorneys Present for Defendants: NONE PRESENT NONE PRESENT Proceedings: IN CHAMBERS- ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: LACK OF JURISDICTION AND FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM Plaintiff asserts two claims for violation of the Fifth Amendment Takings Clause and Fourteenth Amendment Due Process clause against Defendants Peggy Pei-Lin and Yi-Ming Su. Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing no later than March 11, 2022, why this action should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state aclaim. See George v. Pac.- CSC Work Furlough, 91 F.3d 1227, 1229 (9th Cir. 1996) (“Individuals bringing actions against private parties for infringement of their constitutional rights, therefore, must show that the private parties’ infringement somehow constitutes state action.”); Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co., 457 U.S. 922, 923-24 (1982) (“Because the [Fourteenth] Amendment is directed at the States, it can be violated only by conduct that may be fairly characterized as ‘state action.””); Lee v. City of Los Angeles, 250 F.3d 668, 687 (9th Cir. 2001) (noting the Fifth Amendment “appl[ies] only to actions of the federal government” and finding the plaintiffs failed to state a claim for violation of the Fifth Amendment because the plaintiffs “do not allege any of the defendants are federal actors’). IT IS SO ORDERED.

00: CV-90 (12/02) CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Initials of Deputy Clerk YS