Seene
Smith v. Seene
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MICHAEL SMITH, Case No.: 20CV173 GPC(JLB)
Plaintiff,
ORDER SUA SPONTE DISMISSING
v. COMPLAINT FOR LACK OF
SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
KENNETH J. SENNE, Defendant. 16 Plaintiff Michael Smith, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint alleging five counts alleging violations of California law. (Dkt. No. 1, Compl.) Plaintiff alleges the ourt has federal question jurisdiction. (Id. ¶ 1.) Discussion The federal court is one of limited jurisdiction and the burden rests on the party asserting jurisdiction. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America, 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994). It possesses only that power authorized by the Constitution or a statute. See Bender v. Williamsport Area Sch. Dist., 475 U.S. 534, 541 (1986). It is constitutionally required to raise issues related to federal subject matter jurisdiction, and may do so sua sponte. Steel Co. v.…