Rhonda Johnson Pawnell v. Lucian Grainge et al

Filing 14

MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION by Judge David O. Carter. Accordingly, the Court orders Plaintiff(s) to show cause in writing within ten (10) days of the date of this order why this act ion should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Defendant(s) may submit a response in the same time period. An amended complaint correcting the deficiencies will be deemed a sufficient response to this order to show cause. (SEE DOCUMENT FOR FURTHER DETAILS.) (rolm)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL Date: July 2, 2024 Case No. 8:24-cv-01362-DOC-KES Title: RHONDA JOHNSON PAWNELL V. LUCIAN GRAINGE ET AL. PRESENT: THE HONORABLE DAVID O. CARTER, JUDGE Karlen Dubon Courtroom Clerk Not Present Court Reporter ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANT: None Present None Present PROCEEDINGS (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION Plaintiff Rhonda Pawnell’s complaint alleges federal question as its jurisdictional basis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1331. However, this allegation appears improper because Plaintiff cites no federal statute, treaty, or provision under which her action arises. Under federal question basis for jurisdiction, Plaintiff’s complaint states: “The basis of the court is all parties are represented by one Label UMG/UMPG. After submitting prior measures for the Defendants to respond. None have rectified the situation.” Compl. at 3. The Complaint goes on to allege that Defendants have wrongfully withheld royalties from Plaintiff. Id. at 4. The Court cannot determine from these allegations any distinct federal question contained in the complaint. Additionally, the complaint does not clearly allege diversity jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332. However, as Ms. Pawnell filled in portions of the complaint relating to diversity jurisdiction, the exercise of diversity jurisdiction would be improper because, according to the complaint, all plaintiffs are not diverse from all defendants. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332; see also Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 267 (1806). Here, both Plaintiff Rhonda Johnson Pawnell and Defendant Sir Lucian Grainge are alleged to be citizens of California. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case No. 8:24-cv-01362-DOC-KES CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL Date: July 2, 2024 Page 2 Accordingly, the Court orders Plaintiff(s) to show cause in writing within ten (10) days of the date of this order why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Defendant(s) may submit a response in the same time period. An amended complaint correcting the deficiencies will be deemed a sufficient response to this order to show cause. The Clerk shall serve this minute order on all parties to the action. MINUTES FORM 11 CIVIL-GEN Initials of Deputy Clerk: kdu

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?