CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No 2:23-cv-06763-JLS-RAO Date: September 15, 2023 Title: Todd Michael Schultz v. Les Tseng et al Present: Honorable JOSEPHINE L. STATON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Gabby Garcia_ N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANT:

Not Present Not Present

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER DISMISSING FOR LACK OF

SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

Plaintiff filed this action pro se on July 31, 2023, alleging medical malpractice against several Defendants. (Compl., Doc. 1.) Because medical malpractice is a state (not federal) claim, Plaintiff can invoke this Court’s jurisdiction only if he establishes diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.

Section 1332 grants federal courts jurisdiction over actions (1) “where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000,” and (2) the parties are “citizens of different states.” The second prong “requires ‘complete diversity’ of citizenship, meaning that ‘the citizenship of each plaintiff is diverse from the citizenship of each defendant.’” Demarest v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A, 920 F.3d 1223, 1226 (9th Cir. 2019).

In his complaint, Plaintiff alleges that he is a resident of Hollywood, suggesting he is a citizen of California. (Compl., Doc. 1 ¶ 9.) Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Les Tseng practices medicine “somewhere around Sacramento” and is a “health practitioner in California,” suggesting that Tseng too is a citizen of California. (Id. ¶ 10.) Therefore, Plaintiff is not diverse from each Defendant. Moreover, Plaintiff failed to make any allegations regarding the citizenship of the remaining Defendants. (See id. ¶¶ 11–13.)

For the foregoing reasons, the Court DISMISSES this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Initials of Preparer: gga ______________________________________________________________________________