Opinion
20-cv-08086-NC
07-14-2021
CORNELIUS LOPES, Plaintiff, v. REDDIT, INC., and others, Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO DISMISS THE AMENDED COMPLAINT
RE: DKT. NOS. ECF 16, 17, 18
NATHANAEL M. COUSINS, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This order is a report and recommendation to a district court judge under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). On June 14, 2021, the Court ordered Plaintiff Cornelius Lopes to show cause as to why this case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction by July 6, 2021. ECF 16. Lopes filed a response on July 7, 2021, and requested the Court to extend the filing deadline to July 7, 2021. ECF 17, 18. The Court grants Lopes' request and accepts the late filings for good cause shown. See ECF 17, 18.
Lopes' response to the order to show cause did not establish whether this Court had diversity or federal question jurisdiction over the case. See ECF 17, 18. Accordingly, I request reassignment of this case to a district court judge. See Williams v. King, 875 F.3d 500, 503-05 (9th Cir. 2017); 28 U.S.C. § 636. I recommend that the district court judge dismiss Lopes' amended complaint on jurisdictional grounds for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Lopes failed to show that there is a federal question or diversity of citizenship with an amount in controversy over $75,000. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331-32; ECF 17, 18.
Lopes' amended complaint and response to the order to show cause references federal questions but does not sufficiently allege any federal question claims. See generally ECF 14, 17, 18 (referencing the Lanham Act, the Federal Wiretap Act, the Copyright Act, Title VII, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983). Rather, Lopes' amended complaint alleges various state law claims. See generally ECF 14, 17, 18 (alleging defamation, libel, and right-of-publicity claims).
Because the Court has already given Lopes four opportunities to cure these deficiencies, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that the amended complaint be dismissed without leave to amend. Any party may object to this order but must do so within 14 days of being served with this order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); N.D. Cal. L.R. 72.
IT IS SO ORDERED.