Pina v. Pina

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of California renewed its order requiring Plaintiff Marcelina Pina to show cause why federal subject-matter jurisdiction exists over her child-support-related claims. The court held that the cited criminal statutes do not create private rights of action, denied as moot Plaintiff’s motions for leave to amend, to quash service, and for an extension of time to serve, and ordered a jurisdictional response by September 12, 2025.

Holdings

1. Section 228 is a criminal statute that does not create a private right of action; therefore, Plaintiff's invocation of the statute does not establish federal-question jurisdiction.
2. The criminal provisions in 26 U.S.C. §§ 7201, 7206, and 7207 do not create private rights of action and therefore do not provide a basis for federal-question jurisdiction.
3. The court may defer consideration of the service-related issues and deny the motions to amend, quash service, and extend time to serve as moot while requiring Plaintiff to demonstrate that subject matter jurisdiction exists.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff's reliance on 18 U.S.C. § 228 establishes federal-question jurisdiction or creates a private right of action.
2. Whether the criminal tax provisions cited in Plaintiff's proposed amended complaint create a private right of action or support federal-question jurisdiction.
3. Whether Plaintiff's motions for leave to amend, to quash service, and for an extension of time to serve Defendant should be decided while subject matter jurisdiction remains unresolved.

Disposition

other