The opinion
1
2
3
4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7 TODD WHITE, Case No. 19-cv-08015-WHO
8 Plaintiff,
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE
9 v. JUDGE'S REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION
10 PAYPAL, INC.,
Re: Dkt. Nos. 2, 8
Defendant.
11
12
13 There are two pending matters before me – pro se plaintiff Todd White’s application to
14 proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) and Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu’s Report and
15 Recommendation to dismiss this IFP action due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Dkt. Nos. 2,
16 8. Having considered the IFP application, I GRANT it.
17 The complaint alleges state law claims for breach of contract, fraud, and violations of
18 California Business & Professions Code § 17200, et seq. Because the claims do not give rise to
19 federal question jurisdiction, Magistrate Judge Ryu issued an order to show cause for plaintiff to
20 clarify whether he alleges the existence of diversity jurisdiction. Dkt. No. 4.
21 In response, the plaintiff asserts that defendant’s principal place of business is in Delaware.
22 Dkt. No. 7. But upon taking judicial notice of defendant’s corporate Statement of Information,
23 Judge Ryu found that defendant’s principal executive office is in San Jose, California, and
24 therefore both parties are citizens of California. Plaintiff attempted to add a new federal claim
25 under 18 U.S.C. § 241, but, as Magistrate Judge Ryu points out, Title 18 of the United States Code
26 codifies federal criminal statutes that may only be prosecuted by the United States government.
27 See Chrysler Corp. v. Brown, 441 U.S. 281, 284 (1979) (discussing the very limited circumstances
1 Magistrate Judge Ryu recommends that this case be dismissed with prejudice for lack of subject
2 || matter jurisdiction.
3 Objections to the recommendation were due no later than 14 days after its service on
4 || February 4, 2020. No objections have been filed as of the date of this Order. I find Magistrate
5 Judge Ryu’s Report correct, well-reasoned, and thorough; I adopt it in every respect. Accordingly,
6 the in forma pauperis request is GRANTED and the case is DISMISSED without prejudice for
7 lack of subject matter jurisdiction. While I am skeptical that a plausible claim can be brought that
8 would give this court jurisdiction, under the rules to liberally allow amendment, I will grant leave
9 to amend within twenty days of the date below.
10 IT IS SO ORDERED.
11 Dated: February 27, 2020
AM H. ORRICK
13 United States District Judge
©
15
16
= 17
Z 18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28