Bivens

Bivens v. Rudolph (Bivens)

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 2, 20211:21-cv-01152California1,073 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 GINESHA BIVENS, No. 1:21-cv-1152 DAD-SAB Plaintiff, v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS

CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR

LINDA RUDOLPH (BIVENS), LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER

JURISDICTION

Defendant. (Doc. No. 1)

17 On July 30, 2021, plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint initiating this action, as well as an application to proceed in forma pauperis and a motion for a temporary restraining order. (Doc. Nos. 1, 2, 4.) The court has reviewed plaintiff’s complaint in conjunction with its review of her motion for a temporary restraining order. Plaintiff asserts that this court has subject matter jurisdiction over her claims based on a federal question; however, in support of this assertion she cites only 28 U.S.C. § 1367. (Doc. No. 1-1.) Plaintiff’s subject matter jurisdiction allegations in her complaint are facially deficient because plaintiff’s complaint appears to assert only state law claims based on…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.