Ziegler v. Yee

Filing 20

ORDER DISMISSING CASE Without Prejudice. Because diversity jurisdiction is not met, the Court DISMISSES the case without prejudice. Signed by Judge Anthony J. Battaglia on 10/20/2017.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(acc)(jrd)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

Robert Ziegler,
Plaintiff,

11
12
13

Case No.: 17-cv-2102-AJB-BLM
ORDER DISMISSING CASE
WITHOUT PREJUDICE

v.
Betty T. Yee, California State Controller,
Defendant.

14
15

Pro se plaintiff Robert Ziegler, who refers to himself as “i: a man; prosecutor,” filed

16

a complaint against the California State Controller, Betty Yee. (Doc. No. 1.) Under Federal

17

Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3), the Court can dismiss the case “at any time” if it

18

determines it “lacks subject-matter jurisdiction . . . .” Federal Courts have “an independent

19

obligation to address sua sponte whether [it] has subject-matter jurisdiction.” Dittman v.

20

California, 191 F.3d 1020, 1025 (9th Cir. 1999).

21

Ziegler filed his complaint under diversity jurisdiction. (Doc. No. 1-1 at 1.) To meet

22

the requirements of diversity jurisdiction, there must be complete diversity between the

23

plaintiff and the defendant, meaning no plaintiff can be the citizen of the same state as any

24

defendant. 28 U.S.C. § 1331; Lincoln Prop. Co. v. Roche, 546 U.S. 81, 89 (2005). Here,

25

Ziegler’s complaint fails to show there is any diversity between himself and Yee. Ziegler’s

26

address is located within the state of California and the defendant is the Controller of

27

California.

28
1
17-cv-2102-AJB-BLM

1
2

Because diversity jurisdiction is not met, the Court DISMISSES the case without
prejudice.

3
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5

Dated: October 20, 2017

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
17-cv-2102-AJB-BLM