Jesse Herrera v. Mercedes-Benz USA LLC

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL

Case No. CV 25-0427-GW (Ex) Date February 7, 2025

Title Herrera, et al. v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC Page 1 of 1

Present: The Honorable DOLLY M. GEE, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

DEREK DAVIS NOT REPORTED Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff(s) Attorneys Present for Defendant(s) None Present None Present

Proceedings: IN CHAMBERS—ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION SHOULD NOT BE REMANDED TO STATE COURT FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (“Defendant”) removed this action to this Court on January 16, 2025, asserting the existence of diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1). Defendant’s removal papers allege, however, only the state of incorporation of Plaintiff Rico Brothers, Inc. (“Rico”), not Rico’s principal place of business. [Doc. # 1 at ¶ 5 (“Notice of Removal”).]

Corporations have dual citizenship, based upon the entity’s state(s) of incorporation and principal place of business. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1). Until Defendant—which bears the burden of establishing jurisdiction here, see Kelly v. Wengler, 822 F.3d 1085, 1094 (9th Cir. 2016) (“A party alleging subject matter jurisdiction has the burden of establishing it.”)—properly alleges a principal place of business for Rico that is diverse from Defendant’s own citizenship (Delaware and Michigan, see Notice of Removal at ¶ 7), the Court cannot be certain that complete diversity exists in this action.

Defendants are therefore ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing no later than February 20, 2025 why this action should not be remanded to the Los Angeles County Superior Court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Failure to file a timely satisfactory response by this deadline will result in the remand of this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.