(PS) Robbins v. Merit Systems Protection Board

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DEANNA ROBBINS, No. 2:21-CV-0621-KJM-DMC 12 Plaintiff,

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

13 v. 14 MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION

BOARD,

15 Defendant. 16

17 18 Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, brings this civil action seeking judicial review 19 of a final decision of the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). 20 Pending before the Court is Defendant’s renewed motion to dismiss this action pursuant to 21 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, ECF No. 28. 22 Plaintiff did not file an opposition. 23 A motion under Rule 12(b)(1) challenges a federal court’s jurisdiction to decide 24 claims alleged in the complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1). The motion may be a factual attack 25 that looks beyond the pleadings to challenge “the substance of a complaint’s jurisdictional 26 allegations despite their formal sufficiency.” White v. Lee, 227 F.3d 1214, 1242 (9th Cir. 2000); 27 St. Clair v. City of Chico, 880 F.2d 199, 201…