Santana v. Hemmerling

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSHUA PAUL SANTANA, Case No.: 21-CV-406-JO-JLB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IFP AND 13 v. DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND 14 JOHN C. HEMMERLING, MARA W. DENYING OTHER PENDING ELLIOTT, and CAROLINA MENDOZA, 15 MOTIONS AS MOOT AND Defendants. GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE 16 AMENDED COMPLAINT 17 18 19 20 21 On March 8, 2021, Plaintiff filed a Complaint and a Motion for Leave to Proceed In 22 Forma Pauperis (“IFP”). For the reasons discussed below, the grants the IFP motion and 23 the Complaint is dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. 24 DISCUSSION 25 I. IFP 26 Upon review of Plaintiff’s affidavit in support of his IFP Motion, the Court finds 27 that Plaintiff has made a sufficient showing of inability to pay the filing fees required to 28 prosecute this action. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s IFP Motion is GRANTED. 1 II. Subject Matter Jurisdiction 2 The first step in a civil action in a United States district court is the “filing of a 3 complaint with the court.” FED. R. CIV. P. 3. Every complaint must contain: “(1) a short 4 and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction,” . . . (2) a short and plain 5 statement showing that the pleader is entitled to relief; and (3) a demand for the relief 6 sought.” FED. R. CIV. P. 8(a)(1)-(3). 7 Federal courts have limited jurisdiction, and limitations on the court’s jurisdiction 8 “must neither be disregarded nor evaded.” Moore v. Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, 9 657 F.3d 890, 894 (9th Cir. 2011) (citing Owen Equip. & Erection Co. v. Kroger, 437 U.S. 10 365, 374 (1978)). The Court must determine sua sponte whether it has subject matter 11 jurisdiction. See Valdez v. Allstate Ins. Co., 372 F.3d 1115, 1116 (9th Cir. 2004). See also 12 FED. R. CIV. P. 12(h)(3) (“If the court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter 13 jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action.”). 14 Here, Plaintiff’s complaint states: 15 I was the victim of a crime. The City Attorney’s Office gave me a restitution form but never gave me a restitution letter. Said office was never helpful and 16 made me, the victim, feel like the criminal. As a consequence, no restitution 17 letter was ever filed or documented or presented to me. The follow-up stated “statements you gave to the police about what occurred!! The same document 18 states that I have the right to pursue compensation for damages through civil 19 proceedings. I would like at least $25,000 if not equal to the amount lost by me. No less, plus [illegible], than what is legally owed to me by the crime 20 committed against me. Plus tort damages. 21 22 Docket no. 1, pp. 2-3. 23 Plaintiff then alleges “Declaratory” and “Tort” with no further explanation and 24 demands a jury trial. Id. Even under the most liberal reading, none of Plaintiff’s current 25 allegations provide a short and plain statement of the Court’s subject matter jurisdiction. 26 FED. R. CIV. P. 8(a)(1)-(3); Watson v. Chessman, 362 F. Supp. 2d 1190, 1194 (S.D. Cal. 27 2005) (“The court will not . . . infer allegations supporting federal jurisdiction; federal 28 subject matter [jurisdiction] must always be affirmatively alleged.”). 1 Thus, because Plaintiff's pleadings fail to allege federal jurisdiction or “state[] a 2 || claim to relief that is plausible on its face,” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (citation 3 omitted), his action must be dismissed. Because Plaintiff is proceeding without counsel, 4 || however, the Court will sua sponte grant him an opportunity to amend. As noted above, 5 ||however, Plaintiff's Amended Complaint must comply with Federal Rule of Civil 6 || Procedure 8. “Each allegation [in a pleading] must be simple, concise, and direct. No 7 technical form 1s required.” FED. R. Clv. P. 8(d)(1). 8 CONCLUSION 9 For the reasons discussed above, Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis is 10 ||}GRANTED, and Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED for lack of subject matter 11 |/jurisdiction. All other pending motions are DENIED without prejudice as moot. The 12 Court GRANTS Plaintiff leave to file an Amended Complaint. If Plaintiff chooses to file 13 |}an Amended Complaint, he must do so on or before April 28, 2022. Failure to do so will 14 || result in the closing of this case. 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 17 || Dated: January 28, 2022 18 19 Ho orgbfe Tinsook Ohta 20 United States District Judge 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28