Boutros

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 Case No.: 25-cv-00055-DMS-VET

ZINIA EZZET BOUTROS,

Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S v. MOTION TO DISMISS AND

DISMISSING CASE

NADA ASHOO ADIADI,

Defendant. 16 17 Pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) or 12(b)(6). (Defendant’s Motion (“Def.’s Mot.”), ECF No. 4). Plaintiff has not filed an Opposition. For the following

22 1 The Court has opted to resolve this Motion in Defendant’s favor based on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), not 12(b)(1). However, Defendant’s jurisdictional argument also has merit. See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327 n.6 (1989) (“A patently insubstantial complaint may be dismissed . . . for 24 want of subject-matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1).”); see also Rice v. U.S. Supreme Ct., 2003 WL 22999539,…