Frye
Frye v. The Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 JASON R. FRYE, Case No. 1:25-cv-00236-SKO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING Plaintiff, SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION 12 v. (Doc. 1)
THE ASSOCATION OF STATE AND
PROVINCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BOARD, et al., 15 Defendants. On February 25, 2025, Plaintiff Jason R. Frye, a California citizen proceeding pro se, filed a complaint against The Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards, Pearson I. Vue, and “each of the 50 states psychology boards,” including the California Board of Psychology, asserting various claims. (Doc. 1.) Plaintiff asserts this Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. (Doc. 1 at 16. See also Doc. 1-1.) The burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction “rests upon the party asserting jurisdiction.” Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994); see also Romero v. Securus Techs., Inc., 216 F. Supp. 3d 1078, 1085 (S.D. Cal. 2016) (“As the…