Meghan Wilt v. Pfizer, Inc.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California grants Meghan Wilt's request to proceed in forma pauperis but dismisses the complaint for failure to establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction. The court concludes that Pfizer is not alleged to have acted under color of state law for purposes of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and that the asserted state-law claims do not independently establish federal jurisdiction. The court grants leave to amend within 28 days or, alternatively, permits voluntary dismissal without prejudice.

Holdings

1. Plaintiff failed to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction because her asserted bases, 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and 42 U.S.C. § 1983, did not support jurisdiction on the allegations pleaded, and the alleged state-law false-advertising and deceptive-practices claims did not independently establish federal jurisdiction.
2. Plaintiff failed to state a cognizable § 1983 claim because she pleaded no facts showing that Pfizer was a state actor or acted under color of state law.
3. Plaintiff was entitled to an opportunity to amend because, in light of her pro se status, the defects might be curable.

Questions Presented

1. Whether plaintiff established a basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction.
2. Whether plaintiff stated a cognizable claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Pfizer.
3. Whether plaintiff should be granted leave to amend after the complaint was found deficient.

Disposition

other