Xiangbin Long v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 XIANGBIN LONG, Case No. 2:24-cv-02402 CV (KESx)

12 Plaintiffs, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY

THIS ACTION SHOULD NOT BE

13 v. DISMISSED WITHOUT WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., et al. PREJUDICE FOR LACK OF 14 SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

15 Defendants. 16 17 18 Federal courts are courts of “limited jurisdiction,” possessing “only that power 19 authorized by the Constitution and statute[.]” Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 20 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994); U.S. Const. art. III, § 2, cl. 1. District courts are presumed to 21 lack jurisdiction unless the contrary appears affirmatively from the record. See 22 DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno, 547 U.S. 332, 342 n. 3 (2006). Additionally, federal 23 courts have an obligation to examine jurisdiction sua sponte before proceeding to the 24 merits of a case. See Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co., 526 U.S. 574, 583 (1999). When 25 a district court determines that there is no…