1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 MARIAH LYN SPATE, Case No. 4:21-cv-00122-YGR 5 Plaintiff,

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: SUBJECT

6 Vv. MATTER JURISDICTION 7 LAKE COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, 8 Defendant. Re: Dkt. No. 1 9 TO PLAINTIFF MARIAH LYN SPATE: YOU ARE HEREBY ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in 10 || writing no later than Monday, January 25, 2021 why this case should not be dismissed for lack 11 || of subject matter jurisdiction. The Court has reviewed the complaint and request for temporary 12 restraining order (Docket Number (“Dkt. No.”’) 1.), and cannot determine the basis for subject g 13 matter jurisdiction! in this federal district court. Unlike a state court, which can hear most matters 14 || including the issuance of restraining orders for stalking or matters involving housing, a federal 3 15 || district court is a court of limited jurisdiction: meaning, it is prohibited from hearing cases except A 16 in limited circumstances. See Lowdermilk v. United States Bank Nat’l Assoc., 479 F.3d 994, 998 5 17 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[A]s federal courts, we are courts of limited jurisdiction[.]”). The Court requests 18 || that Ms. Spate write to clarify and explain why this case belongs in federal court and should not be 19 || dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. A failure to respond by the above date will 20 || result in the dismissal of this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. 21 IT Is SO ORDERED. 22 || Dated: January 11, 2021 23 Lyon Haptefflees,—

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

25 26 ' The Court explains to Ms. Spate that subject matter jurisdiction is the ability of the Court 97 || to hear the case and its claims. In general, there are two grounds for subject matter jurisdiction: (1) diversity jurisdiction, requiring parties of diverse states and a minimum of $75,000 in 2g || controversy; and (2) federal question jurisdiction, which involves a federal law or federal right.