Opinion
22-cv-07054-SK
01-19-2023
ALLEN MCFARLAND, Plaintiff, v. GUS FULDWER, et al., Defendants.
Regarding Docket No. 1
ORDER TO REASSIGN CASE AND REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO DISMISS
SALLIE KIM UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
On November 10, 2022, Plaintiff Allen McFarland (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis. (Dkt. Nos. 1, 2.) On November 15, 2022, the Court granted the application and issued a screening order describing the deficiencies in Plaintiff's complaint and setting a deadline for the filing of an amended complaint of December 13, 2022. (Dkt. 5.) The Court further directed Plaintiff to the Northern District of California guide for pro se litigants, as well as the Legal Help Center.
To date, Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint. However, Plaintiff filed a document with the Court on December 29, 2022. (Dkt. No. 8.) In the document, Plaintiff asked the Court to grant damages to Plaintiff for violations of the California Labor Code. These arguments mirror the deficiencies in Plaintiff's initial complaint, where Plaintiff failed to show that this Court had subject matter jurisdiction. Based on the filings made by Plaintiff, this case does not involve a federal question, and it does not meet the standards for diversity jurisdiction. (Dkt. No. 4.)
Defendant has not consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), and, therefore, the Court does not have authority to make a dispositive ruling in this case. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that this case be REASSIGNED to a District Judge. The Court HEREBY RECOMMENDS that the District Court DISMISS this action without prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
Any party may serve and file specific written objections to this recommendation within fourteen days after being served with a copy. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); Civil L.R. 72-3.
IT IS SO ORDERED.