Spruel v. Childrens Administration

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE MICHELLE BETTY SPRUEL, CASE NO. C24-1313-JCC Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. CHILDRENS ADMINISTRATION, et al., 13 Defendants.

15 This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. On August 28, 2024, the Honorable S.

16 Kate Vaughn, United States Magistrate Judge, granted Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (Dkt. No. 6.) Plaintiff’s complaint (Dkt. No. 7) was entered shortly thereafter. Upon reviewing Plaintiff’s complaint, this Court ordered Plaintiff to file an amended complaint demonstrating the basis for this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction.1 (See Dkt. No. 8.) Plaintiff did so. But, like the last, her amended complaint fails to establish this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction. Given the parties and claims involved, it would appear this case is more appropriate for King County Superior Court.

23 Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES the case without prejudice. The Clerk is DIRECTED Subject-matter jurisdiction refers to the Court's power to hear a case. Union Pac. R.R. Co. v. Bhd. of Locomotive Eng’rs & Trainmen Gen. Comm. of Adjustment, 558 U.S. 67, 81 (2009).

“Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction.” Richardson v. United States, 943 F.2d 1107, 1108 (9th Cir. 1991).

1 to close this case.

2 DATED this 27th day of September 2024.

A John C. Coughenour 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE