Maria V. Centeno Martinez v. Nissan North America, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MARIA V. CENTENO MARTINEZ, et Case No. 2:24-cv-03725-FLA (JCx) al.,

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY

Plaintiffs, ACTION SHOULD NOT BE v. REMANDED FOR LACK OF

SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

15 NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, et al., Defendants.

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Federal courts are courts of “limited jurisdiction,” possessing only “power authorized by the Constitution and statute[.]” Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994); U.S. Const. art. III, § 2, cl. 1. Courts are presumed to lack jurisdiction unless the contrary appears affirmatively from the record. See DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno, 547 U.S. 332, 342 n. 3 (2006). Additionally, federal courts have an obligation to examine jurisdiction sua sponte before proceeding to the merits of a case. See Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co., 526 U.S. 574, 583 (1999). Federal courts have jurisdiction where an action arises under federal law or where…