(PS) Hawk v. Flix North America, Inc ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SHAWN HAWK, No. 2:23–cv–00049–KJM CKD PS 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. 14 FLIX NORTH AMERICA, INC., et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. The matter was referred to a United States 18 Magistrate Judge as provided by Local Rule 302(c). On April 4, 2023, the magistrate judge 19 recommended this action be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. ECF No. 3. 20 Plaintiff objected. ECF No. 4. 21 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 22 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the file, the court finds the 23 findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 24 Plaintiff’s allegations about a bus ticket refund and a canceled quarter-million-dollar meeting do 25 not support a claim to this court’s subject matter jurisdiction. See Nietzke v. Williams, 26 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 536–37 (1974). He may be able to 27 pursue relief in another more appropriate venue. 28 ///// ] Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 2 1. The April 4, 2023 findings and recommendations (ECF No. 3) are adopted in full; 3 2. Plaintiffs motion to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED AS MOOT; 4 3. The action is DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; and 5 4. The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case. 6 || DATED: May 17, 2023. 7 8 ( ti / ¢ q_/ 9 CHIEF NT] ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28