Osuna

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10 Case No. 1:24-cv-01122-KES-SKO JAMIE OSUNA,

Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY

COMPLAINT SHOULD NOT BE

v. DISMISSED FOR LACK OF SUBJECT

MATTER JURISDICTION

OLIVIA LaVOICE, et al.,

Defendants. (Doc. 14)

/ 17 18 Plaintiff Jamie Osuna is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action. (Doc. 14). Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint on October 3, 2024. (Doc. 8 (“FAC”)). The civil cover sheet filed with Plaintiff’s original complaint as well as Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint indicate that the case is brought by Plaintiff under diversity jurisdiction. (Doc. 1-1 at 1; FAC ¶ 1). The jurisdictional allegations of the Complaint appear to be defective. I. LEGAL STANDARD This Court has a sua sponte obligation to confirm that it has subject matter jurisdiction. Nevada v. Bank of Am. Corp., 672 F.3d 661, 673 (9th Cir. 2012) (“[I]t is well established that ‘a court may raise the question of…