NWHW Holdings, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh PA

• Court: District Court, C.D. California
• Decided: August 25, 2023
• Docket: 8:22-cv-01030
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. SACV 22-01030-CJC (KESx) Date: August 25, 2023

Title: NWHW HOLDINGS, INC. v. NAT’L UNION FIRE INS. CO. OF PITTSBURGH, P.A.

PRESENT:

HONORABLE CORMAC J. CARNEY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Rolls Royce Paschal N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANT:

None Present None Present

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

Plaintiff NWHW Holdings, Inc. filed this action on May 20, 2022, asserting that the Court has diversity jurisdiction. (Dkt. 1 ¶ 8.) Diversity jurisdiction exists when there is complete diversity of citizenship between the parties and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a); Cohn v. Petsmart, Inc., 281 F.3d 837, 839 (9th Cir. 2002). Plaintiff alleges that there is complete diversity because “Plaintiff is a Delaware corporation with its headquarters in Florida[,]” and “Defendant is a Pennsylvania corporation with its headquarters in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.” (Dkt. 1 ¶¶ 1–2.) However, Plaintiff in its recent motion for partial summary judgment argues that the dispute “is presumably governed by Pennsylvania law, since [the subject contract for insurance coverage] identifies Pennsylvania as the state of Plaintiff’s incorporation and place of business.” (Dkt. 26-1 at 6 n.4; Dkt. 29-12 [Policy Declarations] at NEW 438.) Indeed, the evidence appears to reflect that Plaintiff, like Defendant, is a Pennsylvania citizen. If Plaintiff and Defendant are both citizens of the state of Pennsylvania, diversity jurisdiction does not exist. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a).

Accordingly, Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing by September 1, 2023 at 9:00AM as to why this matter should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff should also address why the subject insurance policy UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. SACV 22-01030-CJC (KESx) Date: August 25, 2023 Page 2

identifies Plaintiff as a Pennsylvania corporation and why Plaintiff uses this policy to argue that Pennsylvania law should apply despite identifying itself as a citizen of Delaware and Florida. Defendant is ORDERED to file a statement regarding jurisdiction by the same date and time.

MINUTES FORM 11 CIVIL-GEN Initials of Deputy Clerk RRP