Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Patrick Bockari v. California Victim

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


January 30, 2013

PATRICK BOCKARI, PLAINTIFF,
v.
CALIFORNIA VICTIM COMPENSATION & GOVERNMENT CLAIMS BOARD,
DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Carolyn K. Delaney United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER AND FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

By order filed December 21, 2012, plaintiff was ordered to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff's response was due January 25, 2013. On January 29, 2013, there having been no response docketed, the court issued findings and recommendations recommending that the action be dismissed.*fn1 On that same day, the Clerk of Court belatedly docketed plaintiff's response to the order to show cause, which had been timely filed by plaintiff on January 25, 2013.*fn2 The court will therefore vacate the previously filed findings and recommendations. /////

In the complaint, plaintiff complains about the actions of a state agency and the manner in which it has calculated payments to plaintiff, who is allegedly the victim of a violent crime. The complaint, however, does not allege a basis for subject matter jurisdiction in this court. In the response to the order to show cause, plaintiff alleges subject matter jurisdiction is proper because the state agency has reduced his benefits based on plaintiff's receipt of social security benefits. A reduction of state benefits based on the receipt of federal benefits does not by itself raise a federal question sufficient to confer subject matter jurisdiction. Because there is no basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction evident in the complaint, and plaintiff has failed to demonstrate a proper basis, this action should be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the findings and recommendations filed January 29, 2013 are vacated; and

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice.

These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.