National Family Assurance Group LLC v. DLJ GSD LLC

• Court: District Court, W.D. Washington
• Decided: January 19, 2021
• Docket: 2:21-cv-00040
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 7 AT SEATTLE 8 NATIONAL FAMILY ASSURANCE GROUP, LLC, 9 Plaintiff, Case No. C21-0040RSL 10 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 11 DLLJ GSD, LLC, 12 Defendant. 13 14 15 This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. On January 13, 2021, plaintiff 16 filed this action in federal court alleging that the Court has jurisdiction based on the 17 diversity of citizenship of the parties. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) (establishing that the 18 federal court’s basic diversity jurisdiction extends to “all civil actions where the matter in 19 controversy exceeds . . . $75,000 . . . and is between . . . citizens of different States.”). 20 “For a case to qualify for federal jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a), there must be 21 complete diversity of citizenship between the parties opposed in interest.” Kuntz v. Lamar 22 Corp., 385 F.3d 1177, 1181 (9th Cir. 2004) (internal citation omitted). In examining 23 whether complete diversity is present, the citizenship of a limited liability company is 24 determined by examining the citizenship of the owners/members. See Johnson v. 25 26 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - 1 1 Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006) (holding that “like a 2 partnership, an LLC is a citizen of every state of which its owners/members are citizens”). 3 Plaintiff has not alleged the citizenship of each of its owners/members or the 4 citizenship of each owner/member of DLJ GSD, LLC. Its conclusory allegation that the 5 parties are citizens of different states is insufficient to meet its burden of establishing the 6 basis of the Court’s jurisdiction. See Indus. Tectonics, Inc. v. Aero Alloy, 912 F.2d 1090, 7 1092 (9th Cir. 1990) (“The party asserting jurisdiction has the burden of proving all 8 jurisdictional facts”); Fed R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) (“If the Court determines at any time that it 9 lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action”). As a result, plaintiff 10 is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why the Court should not dismiss this action pursuant 11 to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) by providing the Court with the citizenship of all of the 12 owners/members of both parties at the time the complaint was filed, by January 29, 2021. 13 The Clerk of the Court is directed to place this order to show cause on the Court’s 14 calendar for that date. 15 16 Dated this 19th day of January, 2021. 17 Robert S. Lasnik 18 United States District Judge 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - 2