The opinion of the court was delivered by: Michael J. Seng United States Magistrate Judge
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION FOR Plaintiff, DISMISSAL OF PLAINTIFF'S ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION (ECF No. 1)
OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS
Plaintiff Robert Galvan is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil action filed October 29, 2012. (Compl., ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff's Complaint is now before the Court for screening. ///////
II. SUMMARY OF PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT
Plaintiff is incarcerated in the Security Housing Unit at Corcoran State Prison. He entered into a contract with Defendant M.S.N.B.C. and was interviewed by Defendant Carney for the television program "Lock Up In Corcoran SHU" which aired nationwide and continues to be broadcast over various media. (Compl. at 1.)
Plaintiff contends the program falsely accuses him of crimes, and defames him (id.) such that Defendants are liable to him for breach of contract, negligence and slander. (Id. at 2.)
Plaintiff and his family have suffered stress, fear and depression as a result of Defendants' actions. (Id. at 1-2.) His family has relocated and his father is unable to work. (Id. at 2.)
Plaintiff names as Defendants M.S.N.B.C. and Ms. Carney. (Id. at 1.) Plaintiff seeks monetary compensation of $50,000 and an apology from Defendants. (Id. at 2.)
III. ANALYSIS OF PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT
A. Pleading Requirements Generally
A complaint must contain "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief . . . ." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations are not required, but "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 1955 (2007). A plaintiff must set forth "sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim that is plausible on its face.'" Id. Facial plausibility demands more than the mere possibility that a defendant committed misconduct and, while factual allegations are accepted as true, legal conclusions are not. Id. at 1949--50.
B. No Subject Matter Jurisdiction
The district court is a court of limited jurisdiction and is not empowered to hear every dispute filed by litigants. See Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Servs., Inc., 545 U.S. 546, 552 (2005); A--Z Int'l. v. Phillips, 323 F.3d 1141, 1145 (9th Cir. 2003). The district court "possess[es] only the power authorized by Constitution and statute," and may only adjudicate claims raising federal questions or involving parties with diverse citizenship. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America, 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994). The federal ...