Garcia v. Experian

Filing 5

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re: subject matter jurisdiction and directing Plaintiff to file a Response to this Order to Show Cause within 21 days. Signed by Judge Ricardo S Martinez. (PM) cc: plaintiff via first class mail

1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

5
6
7

JOSE ANGEL GABRIEL GARCIA,

8

Plaintiff,

9

12
13

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

v.

10
11

Case No. C18-00005RSM

EXPERIAN,
Defendant.
Pro se Plaintiff Jose Angel Gabriel Garcia has been granted leave to proceed in forma

14
15
16

pauperis in this matter. Dkt. #3. The Complaint was posted on the docket on January 12,
2018. Dkt. #4. Summons has not yet been issued.

17

Plaintiff, a Washington State resident, brings this action against Experian, the credit

18

reporting agency, located in Texas. Dkt. #4 at 1–2. The only stated basis for this Court’s

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

jurisdiction is diversity of citizenship. Id. at 3. However, the amount in controversy is stated
as $40,000, and Plaintiff seeks in relief only $40,000. Id. Under “Statement of Claim,”
Plaintiff writes only that “Defendant has been responsible for the denial of 4 loans.” Id. at 5.
To establish subject matter jurisdiction on the basis of diversity, the plaintiff must show
an amount in controversy in excess of $75,000. 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 12(h)(3) provides that the Court must dismiss an action if it determines, at any time,

27

that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction. This issue can be raised sua sponte. Furthermore, the

28

Court will dismiss a Complaint at any time if the action fails to state a claim, raises frivolous or

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - 1

1
2

malicious claims, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.
See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

3

The Complaint indicates an amount in controversy less than the statutory requirement

4

for diversity jurisdiction. Furthermore, Plaintiff does not support his claims with sufficient

5
6
7

facts to establish a claim, or reference any cause of action or legal basis for his suit.
Considering all of the above, the Court believes it lacks subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff’s

8

Complaint suffers from deficiencies that, if not adequately explained in response to this Order,

9

will require dismissal. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

10
11
12

In Response to this Order, Plaintiff must write a short and plain statement telling the
Court (1) how he could amend his Complaint, consistent with the facts already pled, to create

13

subject matter jurisdiction, and (2) why this case should not be dismissed as frivolous. This

14

Response may not exceed six double-spaced (6) pages. Plaintiff is not permitted to file

15

additional pages as attachments. The Court will take no further action in this case until

16

Plaintiff has submitted this Response.

17
18

Accordingly, the Court hereby finds and ORDERS that Plaintiff shall file a Response to

19

this Order to Show Cause containing the detail above no later than twenty-one (21) days

20

from the date of this Order. Failure to file this Response will result in dismissal of this case.

21

The Clerk shall send a copy of this Order to Plaintiff at 509 THIRD AVENUE #711,

22
23
24

SEATTLE, WA 98104.
DATED this 22 day of January, 2018.

25

A

26

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

27
28

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - 2