Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-00972/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-00972-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Fair Labor Standards

---

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

 1 The holding of this court is limited to the facts and the particular circumstances

underlying the present motion.

 2 This court is ordering reassignment to a District Court Judge because, absent

consent of all parties, a Magistrate Judge does not have authority to dismiss the case.

ORDER, page 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

SANDRA K. BEAUCHAMP,

Plaintiff,

v.

TOM HARRINGTON, ET AL.,

Defendants. __________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: C 08-00972 PVT

ORDER THAT CASE BE

REASSIGNED AND

RECOMMENDATION THAT CASE

BE DISMISSED WITH LEAVE TO

AMEND 

On February 15, 2008, plaintiff filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis.

1

 

Based on the application and the file herein,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case be reassigned to a District Court Judge2 with

the recommendation that the case be dismissed with leave to amend. A federal court must

dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint if the complaint is: 1) frivolous; 2) fails to state a claim

on which relief may be granted; or seeks 3) monetary relief against a defendant who is immune

from such relief. See, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see also Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 324

(1989). 

Case 5:08-cv-00972-JF Document 4 Filed 02/22/08 Page 1 of 3
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

ORDER, page 2

In her complaint, plaintiff alleges that defendant engaged in numerous violations of

section 1182.8 of the labor code. However, the labor code section referenced in the complaint is

a California state law. Plaintiff alleges no additional basis for jurisdiction in federal court. In

order for the federal court to have jurisdiction over the matter, plaintiff may allege, inter alia,

violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Before dismissing a complaint, however, a district court must give pro se litigants an

opportunity to amend their complaint unless it is absolutely clear that no amendment could cure

the defect. See, Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). From the brief

facts stated in Plaintiff’s complaint, it is not possible to determine whether or not Plaintiff will be

able to amend her complaint to establish grounds for extending the sixty day time period within

which a civil action for judicial review must be commenced. See, Bowen v. City of New York,

476 U.S. 467 (1986) (holding that statute of limitations subject to equitable tolling under some

circumstances). Thus, leave to amend appears appropriate.

Dated: February 22, 2008

__________________________

PATRICIA V. TRUMBULL

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:08-cv-00972-JF Document 4 Filed 02/22/08 Page 2 of 3
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

ORDER, page 3

copies mailed on February 22, 2008 to:

Sandra Beauchamp

PO Box 112353

Campbell, CA 95011

Tom Harrington

Harrington Properties Management

105 Fremont Avenue, Suite B

Los Altos, CA 94022

 EunHae Park for

 Corinne Lew

 Courtroom Deputy 

Case 5:08-cv-00972-JF Document 4 Filed 02/22/08 Page 3 of 3