Miroyan

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 MICHAEL MIROYAN, Case No. 3:19-cv-03626-WHO

8 Plaintiff,

ORDER DISMISSING CASE

v. 9 Re: Dkt. No. 27 10 TAE KAI, et al., Defendants. 11

12 13 On September 11, 2019, I dismissed pro se plaintiff Michael Miroyan’s complaint for lack 14 of federal subject matter jurisdiction.1 Dkt. No. 22. Miroyan pleaded federal claims against Judge 15 Robert D.S. Kim of the Third Circuit in Hawaii, but there was no evidence in the docket that 16 Judge Kim had been served, Miroyan had alleged no facts to support the claims, and the claims 17 seemed to be barred. The remaining claims were based in state law, and in the clear absence of 18 diversity jurisdiction,2 I lacked jurisdiction over them. In that Order, I gave Miroyan until October 19 2, 2019 to file a first amended complaint. On October 1, Miroyan requested additional time to 20 amend; I granted his request in part and gave him until October 16 to file an amended complaint.3 21 See Dkt. Nos. 23, 24. 22 On October 15, 2019, Miroyan filed several documents. …