Hart v. Google Inc.

Background

Stephen S. Hart, identified as a state prisoner at New Castle Correctional Facility and proceeding without a lawyer, filed a complaint against Google Inc. He alleged violations of Google's terms of service. More specifically, the complaint stated that Google fell short of its contractual terms of use and privacy statements by allowing Hart's accounts to be breached. Hart also filed a motion to proceed without paying the filing fee; the court deferred ruling on that motion.

Jurisdictional concern

Hart alleged that he and Google are residents of California. He asserted that the court had federal-question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, which covers civil cases arising under federal law. But the court noted that the complaint did not identify an applicable federal statute and appeared to allege only a contract claim.

The court also explained that diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 generally requires the parties to be citizens of different states and an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000. Because Hart alleged that both parties are residents of California, the court stated that jurisdiction appeared to be lacking.

Order

The court ordered Hart to show cause—that is, to explain—why the case should not be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Hart must file a written response within 28 days of the order. The order states that failure to respond will result in dismissal of the matter without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The court did not yet dismiss the case and deferred ruling on the filing-fee motion until after Hart responds.

The opinion's signature clearly shows the surname "Lee" and middle initial "K.," but the first name is not clear in the provided text.