Summary
The Eastern District of California grants Armando Rodriguez’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. The court dismisses the complaint for failure to allege a federal claim or establish federal-question or diversity jurisdiction, but grants leave to amend within thirty days.
Holdings
- Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis satisfied the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and was granted.
- The complaint failed to establish federal-question or diversity jurisdiction because it did not allege a specific federal cause of action or facts supporting a claim within the court's original jurisdiction, and diversity jurisdiction was unavailable where plaintiff and defendants were citizens of California.
- The complaint was dismissed with leave to amend because it was not absolutely clear that the jurisdictional defect could not be cured by amendment.
Questions Presented
- Whether the plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis satisfied the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915.
- Whether the complaint established federal-question or diversity subject matter jurisdiction.
- Whether the complaint should be dismissed with leave to amend rather than without leave to amend.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (9)
- Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 342 & n.7 (9th Cir. 2010)(followed)
- Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130-31 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc)(followed)
- Cahill v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., 80 F.3d 336, 339 (9th Cir. 1996)(followed)
- Harrison v. Kernan, 971 F.3d 1069, 1073 (9th Cir. 2020)(followed)
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83, 89 (1998)(followed)
- Grancare, LLC v. Thrower ex rel. Mills, 889 F.3d 543, 549-50 (9th Cir. 2018)(followed)
- Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325, 327 (1989)(followed)
- McDaniel v. Hinch, No. 2:17-cv-02448-KJM-CKD (E.D. Cal. July 11, 2018)(followed)
- Lucas v. Department of Corrections, 66 F.3d 245, 248 (9th Cir. 1995)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…