1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 7 KATHLEEN N. ZEIGLER, 8 Case No. 2:22-cv-00155-RFB-NJK Plaintiff(s), 9 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE v. 10 DETR – PANDEMIC UNEMPLOYMENT 11 ASSISTANCE, 12 Defendant(s). 13 The Court has a duty to ensure that it has subject matter jurisdiction over the dispute before 14 it, an issue it may raise at any time during the proceedings. See, e.g., Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3). 15 Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and possess only that power authorized by the 16 Constitution and statute. See Rasul v. Bush,

(2004). “A federal court is 17 presumed to lack jurisdiction in a particular case unless the contrary affirmatively appears.” Stock 18 West, Inc. v. Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation,

(9th Cir. 1989). 19 “The party asserting federal jurisdiction bears the burden of proving that the case is properly in 20 federal court.” McCauley v. Ford Motor Co.,

(9th Cir. 2001) (citing McNutt v. 21 General Motors Acceptance Corp.,

(1936)). 22 In this case, Plaintiff is appealing the denial of unemployment assistance by the Nevada 23 Employment Security Division. See Docket No. 2-1 at 6. Judicial review of such a denial is 24 obtained by “commencing an action in the district court of the county where the employment which 25 is the basis of the claim was performed.” N.R.S. 612.530(1) (emphasis added). Hence, federal 26 district courts lack jurisdiction over such an appeal as it must “be brought before the District Court 27 for the State of Nevada in the County in which the work was performed, rather than the United 28 States District Court.” Ullauri-Moron v. Nev. Dept. of Emp., Training, & Rehab.,

} 4891722, at *2 (D. Nev. Sept. 6, 2012), adopted,

(D. Nev. Oct. 3, 2012); see 2|| also Moore v. Nev.,

, at *2 (D. Nev. Nov. 13, 2020), adopted,

3]| (D. Nev. June 4, 2021).! 4 Accordingly, Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to show cause in writing, no later than February 17, 2022, why this case should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction without prejudice 6|| to Plaintiff bringing a claim in state court.” 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 Dated: February 2, 2022 Li a i Nancy J>Koppé 10 United States Magistrate Judge 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24) —______ ' That Plaintiff invokes the federal CARES Act does not appear to establish jurisdiction 25! over her appeal of the denial of unemployment benefits. See Paskiewicz v. Brower,

, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 3, 2020),

(E.D. Cal. Jan. 21, 2021). ? Because this case was initiated in federal court, it does not appear that the Court is empowered to “transfer” or “remand” the matter to state court. See, e.g., Buffalo Biodiesel, Inc. v. Schneiderman,

, at *7-10 (W.D.N.Y. Sept. 5, 2017), adopted,

] 4285901 (W.D.N.Y. Sept. 27, 2017).