Regency Apartments Vancouver LLC v. The Sherwin-Williams Company

• Court: District Court, W.D. Washington
• Decided: December 2, 2020
• Docket: 3:20-cv-05026
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE 9 REGENCY APARTMENTS VANCOUVER CASE NO. C20-5026-JCC LLC, 10 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 11 Plaintiff, v. 12 THE SHERWIN-WILLIAMS COMPANY 13 d/b/a UNIFLEX COATINGS, 14 Defendant. 15

16 This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. Plaintiff Regency Apartments Vancouver 17 LLC alleges that the Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 because 18 the amount in controversy is more than $75,000. (See Dkt. No. 1 at 1–2.) Defendant The 19 Sherwin-Williams Company admits that jurisdiction is proper. (See Dkt. No. 8 at 2.) However, 20 the Court has an independent obligation to determine it has jurisdiction and must dismiss the 21 action if it “determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 22 12(h)(3). Here, Plaintiff’s complaint does not provide sufficient information to allow the Court to 23 determine whether it has subject-matter jurisdiction over this matter. 24 “A limited liability company ‘is a citizen of every state of which its owners/members are 25 citizens,’ not the state in which it was formed or does business.” NewGen, LLC v. Safe Cig, LLC, 26 840 F.3d 606, 612 (9th Cir. 2016) (quoting Johnson v. Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 1 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006)). Accordingly, to properly plead diversity jurisdiction, Regency 2 Apartments Vancouver LLC was required to plead “the citizenship of all of [its] members” and 3 show that there was complete diversity at the time the case was filed. Id. at 611. It did not. (See 4 Dkt. No. 1 at 1–2.) Further, Regency Apartments’ corporate disclosure statement does not 5 include information required by Local Civil Rule 7.1 that the Court could use to evaluate 6 whether it has subject-matter jurisdiction. (See Dkt. No. 4.) 7 Even so, “[d]efective jurisdictional allegations are not fatal.” NewGen, LLC, 840 F.3d at 8 612. “Courts may permit parties to amend defective allegations of jurisdiction at any stage in the 9 proceedings.” Id.; see also 28 U.S.C. § 1653. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff Regency 10 Apartments Vancouver LLC to show cause why the Court should not dismiss this action for lack 11 of subject-matter jurisdiction by, within fourteen days of the date of this order, filing a corporate 12 disclosure statement that complies with Local Civil Rule 7.1 and an amended complaint that 13 alleges the members of Regency Apartments Vancouver LLC and their citizenship as of the date 14 the complaint was filed. The Court does not grant leave to amend any other allegations in the 15 complaint. 16 DATED this 2nd day of December 2020. A 17 18 19 John C. Coughenour 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26