United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
RICARDO S. MARTINEZ CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter comes before the Court sua sponte and on the
Order's prior Order to Show Cause, Dkt. #5. Pro
se Plaintiff Lisa Linn Owen has been granted leave to
proceed in forma pauperis in this matter. Dkt. #2.
The Complaint was posted on the docket on June 10, 2019. Dkt.
#3. Summonses have not yet been issued.
Owen brings suit against Dr. Ryder Gwinn, Swedish Hospital
Cherry Hill, and others. Id. She checks the box for
“federal question” as the basis for this
Court's jurisdiction, but leaves blank a spot in her
Complaint for “the specific federal statutes, federal
treaties, and/or provisions of the United States Constitution
that are at issue in this case.” Id. at 3. Ms.
Owen alleges that she is allergic to morphine, wears a red
plastic bracelet to alert hospital staff of this fact, yet
was forced to get two injections of morphine by Defendants
and went into anaphylactic shock. Id. at 5. She also
alleges Defendants performed emergency surgery on her without
her authorization, leading to pain and other complications.
It appears to the Court that Ms. Owen alleges these events
occurred the week of July 20, 2015. Id. at 9. She
alleges continuing medical issues from these events up until
the current year.
28, 2019, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause stating
that the Court appears to lack subject matter jurisdiction in
this case, and that Ms. Owen's claims appear frivolous
and untimely. Dkt. #5. Specifically, she was asked to provide
the following: “(1) the law or laws upon which her
claims are based, (2) why this Court has subject matter
jurisdiction to hear these claims, and (3) why this case
should not be dismissed as frivolous.” Id.
Owen's Response is difficult to follow and does not
provide satisfactory answers to these questions. For example,
she states “Federal Question Jurisdiction: I understand
this to mean, that I am seeking Jurisdiction of governance
permission, right-addresses…” Dkt. #6 at 1.
Later, she states “Subject Matter Jurisdiction: Is
criminal negligence, Medical Malpractice. Isn't it a
Federal Offense to murder someone, pre-meditated and
standby by [sic] and watch and do nothing to help me the
patient?” Id. at 2. She goes on to state
“Federal question: Federal jurisdiction known as
Diversity Justification Vindication: Dr. Ryder Patten Gwinn
has resided in Elk Grove Village, Illinois 60007 prior to
moving to Bellevue, Washington. Jordan Steed lives in
Kirkland, WA. Jane Doe North African American woman, has Dual
citizenship, Florida, Washington state, North Africa
Court will dismiss a Complaint at any time if the action
fails to state a claim, raises frivolous or malicious claims,
or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from
such relief. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
Because Ms. Owen has filed this case in Federal Court,
subject matter jurisdiction may be based on diversity or the
existence of a federal question, as set forth in 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1331 and 1332. Plaintiff alleges that the
jurisdictional basis for this lawsuit is federal question
jurisdiction. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331, federal
district courts have original jurisdiction over “all
civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or
treaties of the United States.” “A case
‘arises under' federal law either where federal law
creates the cause of action or ‘where the vindication
of a right under state law necessarily turn[s] on some
construction of federal law.'” Republican Party
of Guam v. Gutierrez, 277 F.3d 1086, 1088-89 (9th Cir.
2002) (quotation omitted). The presence or absence of federal
question jurisdiction is governed by the “well-pleaded
complaint rule, which provides that federal question
jurisdiction exists only when a federal question is presented
on the face of the plaintiff's properly pleaded
complaint.” Smallwood v. Allied Van Lines,
Inc., 660 F.3d 1115, 1120 (9th Cir. 2011) (citing
Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams, 482 U.S. 386, 392, 107
S.Ct. 2425, 96 L.Ed.2d 318 (1987)).
Court finds that Ms. Owen has failed to set forth a basis for
this Court's subject matter jurisdiction in her Complaint
or in her Response. Murder-or medical malpractice for that
matter-are not generally federal offenses. Ms. Owen has
failed to point to some other basis under law for this case
to be properly filed in federal court. She alludes to
diversity jurisdiction at one point in her Response, but it
is clear to the Court that all Defendants now reside in the
same state as Ms. Owen. It is irrelevant that a nurse
appeared to Ms. Owen to be of North African descent, or that
Defendants may have lived in other states prior to this
lawsuit being filed.
all of the above, the Court will dismiss this action for
failing to state a claim and for frivolousness. See
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Having reviewed the relevant
briefing and the remainder of the record, the Court hereby
finds and ORDERS:
Plaintiff's claims are DISMISSED.
pending Motions ...