Jones v. Dr. Cam Thuy Quang Tran M.D. et al

1
3:24-cv-2032-CAB-MMP
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JAREN D. JONES,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAM THUY QUANG TRAN, et al.,
Defendants.
Case No.: 3:24-cv-2032-CAB-MMP
ORDER:
(1) DENYING MOTIONS TO
DISMISS AS MOOT [Doc. Nos. 11, 12,
15];
(2) VACATING CURRENT
BRIEFING SCHEDULE [Doc. No.
17]; and
(3) REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO
SHOW CAUSE REGARDING
JURISDICTION.
On March 18, 2026, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint with revised
defendants and claims. [Doc. No. 18 (“FAC”).] The Court therefore DENIES AS MOOT
the pending motions to dismiss based on the original Complaint, [Doc. Nos. 11, 12, 15],
and VACATES the related briefing schedule, [Doc. No. 17].
The Court may consider the issue of subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte at any
time during the proceeding, and if the Court finds it lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the
Court must dismiss the action. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3); Scholastic Ent., Inc. v. Fox Ent.
Grp., Inc., 336 F.3d 982, 985 (9th Cir. 2003).
Case 3:24-cv-02032-CAB-MMP Document 19 Filed 03/19/26 PageID.<pageID>
Page 1 of 2

2
3:24-cv-2032-CAB-MMP
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
The FAC alleges diversity jurisdiction as the basis for this Court’s jurisdiction.
[Doc. No. 18 at 5.] However, it appears that Plaintiff and several of the named Defendants
are citizens of California. [Id. at 4 (naming “Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc., Kaiser
Foundation Hospitals, and Southern California Permanente Medical Group” as Defendants
with an address in Pasadena, California), and 5 (identifying Plaintiff as a California
citizen).] 	The FAC thus indicates that complete diversity is lacking. 	In the absence of
complete diversity or federal question jurisdiction, federal courts are without power to
adjudicate a case. Owens Equip. & Erection Co. v. Kroger, 437 U.S. 365, 377 (2006).
Plaintiff is therefore ordered to show cause by March 31, 2026, the basis for subject
matter jurisdiction in this case. 	If Plaintiff does not respond to this order by March 31,
2026, this case shall be 	dismissed without prejudice 	for improper subject matter
jurisdiction, allowing Plaintiff to refile in the appropriate court.
It is SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 19, 2026
Case 3:24-cv-02032-CAB-MMP Document 19 Filed 03/19/26 PageID.<pageID>
Page 2 of 2