Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-02388/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-02388-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity Action

---

1

18cv2388-LAB (AGS)

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

ZINIA EZZET BOUTROS,

Plaintiff,

v.

UPS, et al.,

Defendant.

Case No.: 18cv2388-LAB (AGS)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff Zinia Ezzet Boutros, proceeding pro se, paid the filing fee and filed 

a 500-page complaint in this case against numerous Defendants, bringing 

numerous claims. 

Boutros printed the pages half-size, and squeezed two onto each sheet of 

paper, in violation of this District’s Civil Local Rule 5.1. The complaint violates this 

rule in several other ways as well. And it violates numerous requirements of Fed. 

R. Civ. P. 8 and 10.

A serious problem is that the complaint does not obey the “short and plain 

statement” requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(1) and (2). Among other things, 

the complaint identifies diversity as the basis for the Court’s jurisdiction, but never 

alleges facts establishing the citizenship of any of the parties. See 28 U.S.C. '

1332(a). The Court is obligated, sua sponte if necessary, to inquire into jurisdiction 

Case 3:18-cv-02388-LAB-AGS Document 3 Filed 10/22/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
2

18cv2388-LAB (AGS)

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

and to dismiss the complaint if jurisdiction is lacking. See Chapman v. Pier 1 

Imports (U.S.) Inc., 631 F.3d 939, 954 (9th Cir. 2011) (en banc). Until it is 

affirmatively shown, jurisdiction is presumed to be lacking. Kokkonen v. Guardian 

Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994).

The complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of jurisdiction. 

No later than November 8, 2018, Boutros may file an amended complaint that fully 

complies with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 and 10 and Civil Local Rule 5.1. In particular, it 

must include a “short and plain statement” alleging facts that establish jurisdiction. 

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(1).

The amended complaint must be received by the Court by the deadline, not 

merely mailed or postmarked. A submitted complaint that does not comply fully 

with this order will be rejected for filing, and Boutros would have to resubmit a 

corrected complaint before the deadline. If Boutros fails to file an acceptable

amended complaint within the time permitted, this action will be dismissed 

without further notice to him. Dismissal would be without prejudice, but without 

leave to amend for lack of jurisdiction, for failure to prosecute, for failure to comply 

with applicable rules, and for failure to obey the Court’s order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 22, 2018

Hon. Larry Alan Burns

United States District Judge

Case 3:18-cv-02388-LAB-AGS Document 3 Filed 10/22/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2