Dean v. Combs et al.

Filing 5

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 12/9/16 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Matter referred to District Judge Troy L. Nunley. Within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. (Kastilahn, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MICHAEL DEAN,

12
13
14

No. 2:16-cv-2776 TLN CKD PS

Plaintiff,
v.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

STEVE COMBS, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

In this action, plaintiff, proceeding pro se, complains about what appears to be a breach of

18

contract dispute involving landscaping services. The complaint, however, does not allege a basis

19

for subject matter jurisdiction in this court other than citing “federal question” jurisdiction,

20

without setting a proper basis therefor. The complaint only cites “$2,000,000” as the basis for

21

federal question jurisdiction. Plaintiff was accordingly ordered to show cause why this action

22

should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

23

Plaintiff has filed a response to the order to show cause. However, the response does not

24

set forth a proper basis for subject matter jurisdiction. There appears to be no federal question

25

subject matter jurisdiction. Diversity jurisdiction is also lacking because the parties are not

26

diverse.

27
28

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for lack of
subject matter jurisdiction.

1

1

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

2

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days

3

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

4

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

5

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections

6

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v.

7

Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

8

Dated: December 9, 2016

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

9
10
11
12

4 dean2776.nosmj.57

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2