Block Mining Inc v. Hosting Source LLC

• Court: District Court, W.D. Washington
• Decided: March 11, 2024
• Docket: 2:24-cv-00319
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2

3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE

9 10 BLOCK MINING, INC., CASE NO. C24-0319JLR 11 Plaintiff, ORDER v. 12 HOSTING SOURCE, LLC, 13 Defendant. 14

15 Before the court is Plaintiff Block Mining, Inc.’s (“Block Mining”) complaint 16 against Defendant Hosting Source, LLC (“Hosting Source”). (Compl. (Dkt. # 1).) 17 Having reviewed the complaint, the court finds that Block Mining has failed to allege an 18 adequate basis for subject matter jurisdiction. The court therefore orders Block Mining to 19 serve and file a submission that includes information sufficient to establish the court’s 20 jurisdiction by no later than March 18, 2024. 21 Block Mining asserts that the court’s jurisdiction is based on diversity of 22 citizenship under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). (Compl. ¶ 8.) “For a case to qualify for federal 1 jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a), there must be complete diversity of citizenship 2 between the parties opposed in interest.” Kuntz v. Lamar Corp., 385 F.3d 1177, 1181

3 (9th Cir. 2004). For purposes of assessing diversity jurisdiction, the court must consider 4 the domicile of all members of a limited liability company. Johnson v. Columbia Props. 5 Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006); see also Local Rules W.D. Wash. 6 LCR 8(a) (“If plaintiff is asserting that this court has jurisdiction based on diversity, the 7 complaint must identify the citizenship of the parties, and, if any of the parties is a limited 8 liability corporation (LLC) . . . identify the citizenship of the . . . members of those

9 entities to establish the court’s jurisdiction.”). Block Mining alleges that Hosting Source 10 “is a Washington limited liability company with its principal place of business in 11 Spokane, Washington.” (Compl. ¶ 7.) Yet, Block Mining fails to allege the citizenship 12 of any of the members of Hosting Source. (See generally id.) Absent such allegations, 13 the court cannot determine if Block Mining has properly invoked this court’s subject

14 matter jurisdiction on the basis of the parties’ diversity of citizenship.1 15 Accordingly, the court ORDERS Block Mining to show cause why this case 16 should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 17 12(h)(3) (“If the court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the 18 court must dismiss the action.”). If Defendants fail to provide the court with the

20 1 The court notes that if any member of Hosting Source is itself a limited liability company, Block Mining must provide information about the citizenship of the members of that limited liability company as well, which is determined in the same manner described above— 21 namely, by establishing the citizenship of each member. See Johnson, 437 F.3d at 899 (examining the citizenship of a limited partnership whose partners included limited liability 22 companies by looking to the citizenship of the members of those limited liability companies). 1 information described above by March 18, 2024, the court will dismiss this case without 2 prejudice.

3 Dated this 11th day of March, 2024. A 4 JAMES L. ROBART 5 United States District Judge 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

19 20 21 22