United States District Court for the Northern District of California, 2022

Kleidman v. Murphy

Kleidman v. Murphy
United States District Court for the Northern District of California · Decided November 2, 2022
Kleidman v. Murphy

Trial Court Opinion

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA PETER KLEIDMAN, Case No. 22-cv-06355-NC Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE TO 12 PLAINTIFF AS TO WHY THE v. COURT SHOULD NOT 13 DISMISS COMPLAINT BERNIE MURPHY, and others, 14 Re: ECF. 1 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff Peter Kleidman filed this action in federal court on October 21, 2022.

18 Plaintiff invokes federal diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The Court ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause as to why this matter should not be dismissed for lack of diversity jurisdiction.

21 Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction with subject matter jurisdiction over matters authorized by the Constitution and Congress. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994). Diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1) requires complete diversity of citizenship and an amount in controversy in excess of $75,000. Complete diversity of citizenship means that “each of the plaintiffs must be a citizen of a different state than each of the defendants.” Allstate Ins. Co. v. Hughes, 358 27 F.3d 1089, 1095 (9th Cir. 2004). Federal district courts have a duty to raise and determine |] jurisdiction may be lacking. Bank Julius Baer & Co. Ltd v. Wikileaks, 535 F. Supp. 2d 2 || 980, 984 (N.D. Cal. 2008).

3 Here, Plaintiff bases the Court’s jurisdiction on diversity grounds. ECF 1 4 5.

4 || However, the description of the parties is incomplete. For example, Plaintiff does not indicate the location of his domicile. Moreover, Defendant Leslie Quist’s domicile is also || not listed in the Complaint. See id. 4/2. These discrepancies prevent the Court from || assessing whether complete diversity is present between Plaintiff and the various || Defendants.

9 Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE as to why this action || should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff must show cause || in writing by November 16, 2022. Because Plaintiff is not represented by counsel, he may || wish to seek assistance from the Federal Pro Se Program by calling 408-297-1480.

13 || Defendants are not required to respond to the Complaint pending disposition of this Order || to Show Cause. ECF 4.

2 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED.

18 || Dated: November 2, 2022 he > _ 19 United States Magistrate Judge

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.