Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00251/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00251-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

YVONNE HOLDEN, No. CIV.S-05-0251 LKK DAD PS

Plaintiff,

v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

LAURA K. LUCIER,

Defendants.

____________________________/

Plaintiff, proceeding in this action pro se, has requested

leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. 

This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 72-302(21),

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

By order filed October 5, 2005, plaintiff was directed to

show cause in writing why this case should not be dismissed for lack

of subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff has timely responded to

that order. However, plaintiff’s response only confirms the court’s

initial determination that this action concerns claims related to a

trespass dispute between plaintiff and her neighbor, claims that are

Case 2:05-cv-00251-LKK -DAD Document 6 Filed 11/02/05 Page 1 of 2
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

1

 Specifically, in her response to the order to show cause

plaintiff explains that she is pursuing this action because her

neighbor has trespassed onto her property, stolen her poultry and

otherwise harassed her using a certain trail, with respect to which

plaintiff has an easement, to carry out many of these acts. 

2

properly pursued in state court.1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be

dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12(h)(3)(“Whenever it appears by suggestion of the parties or

otherwise that the court lacks jurisdiction of the subject matter,

the court shall dismiss the action.”).

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the

United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the

provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within ten days after being

served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file

written objections with the court. Such a document should be

captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and

Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file

objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal

the District Court’s order. See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th

Cir. 1991).

DATED: October 31, 2005.

DAD:th

Ddadl\orders.prose\holden0251.f&r

Case 2:05-cv-00251-LKK -DAD Document 6 Filed 11/02/05 Page 2 of 2