Foster v. State of Hawaii Department of Accounting and General Services, et al
Filing
13
ORDER OF DISMISSAL signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 6/8/2011 ORDERING that this action is DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. CASE CLOSED. (Zignago, K.)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
Marie Foster,
Plaintiff,
8
v.
9
10
11
12
13
State of Hawaii Department of
Accounting and General Services;
Hawaii state Archives; Julie A.
Ugalde, Risk Management Officer,
Defendants.
________________________________
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
2:10-cv-02640-GEB-DAD
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
14
Plaintiff’s Complaint and her counsel’s declaration filed in
15
response to the May 19, 2011 Order to Show Cause (“OSC”) reveal this
16
action should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
17
“It is a fundamental principle that federal courts are courts
18
of limited jurisdiction.” Owen Equip. & Erection Co. v. Kroger, 437 U.S.
19
365, 374 (1978). “The lack of subject matter jurisdiction may be raised
20
at any time, and the court is obligated to address the issue sua
21
sponte.” Health Facilities of Cal. Mut. Ins. Co., Inc. v. British Am.
22
Ins. Grp., Ltd., No. CV 10-3736 PSG (JCGx), 2011 WL 1296488, at *2 (C.D.
23
Cal. Apr. 5, 2011)(citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3)).
24
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 8(a) prescribes that
25
a Complaint must contain “a short and plain statement of the grounds for
26
the court’s jurisdiction[.]” Local Rule 204 further requires that Rule
27
8(a)’s
28
.
.
.
jurisdictional
state
the
statement
claimed
“appear
statutory
1
or
as the first allegation[,]
other
basis
of
federal
1
jurisdiction[, and] . . . state the facts supporting such jurisdictional
2
claim.” E.D. Cal. R. 204.
3
Plaintiff’s Complaint only alleges state law claims and fails
4
to include a jurisdictional statement as required by Rule 8(a) and Local
5
Rule 204. (ECF No. 1.) Further, Plaintiff’s counsel declared in response
6
to the May 19, 2011 OSC that “[Plaintiff’s] complaint cannot proceed in
7
federal court due to jurisdictional problems.” (Decl. of Ilija Cvetich
8
re: Order to Show Cause ¶ 3, ECF No. 12.) Therefore, this action is
9
dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
10
Dated:
June 8, 2011
11
12
13
GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.
United States District Judge
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
