Steve Molino v. Volvo Car USA LLC

CourtDistrict Court, C.D. California
DecidedSeptember 25, 2023
Docket8:23-cv-01743
StatusUnknown

This text of Steve Molino v. Volvo Car USA LLC (Steve Molino v. Volvo Car USA LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, C.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Steve Molino v. Volvo Car USA LLC, (C.D. Cal. 2023).

Opinion

_____________________________________________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No.: 8:23-cv-01265-FWS-DFM Date: September 25, 2023 Title: Bohbot LLC v. Entrepreneur Consulting Services, LLC

Present: HONORABLE FRED W. SLAUGHTER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Melissa H. Kunig N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants:

Not Present Not Present

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

Jurisdiction in this action is alleged on the basis of diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. However, it appears the court may lack subject matter jurisdiction because the Complaint may not adequately allege the citizenship of all artificial entities. (See Dkt. 1.)

Diversity jurisdiction requires complete diversity between the parties and that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. See Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 267, 267 (1806); 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). In the case of a partnership, limited liability company, or other unincorporated association, the court must consider the citizenship of each of the partners, including limited partners, or members. The citizenship of each of the entity’s partners or members must therefore be alleged. Carden v. Arkoma Assocs., 494 U.S. 185, 195-96 (1990); Johnson v. Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006). Where a party is joined as a corporation, the complaint must allege both its respective state(s) of incorporation and principal place of business. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c); Harris v. Rand, 682 F.3d 846, 850 (9th Cir. 2012).

Here, the Complaint alleges Plaintiff Bohbot, LLC, is a New York limited liability company with its principal place of business in New York, while Defendant Entrepreneur Consulting Services, LLC is a California limited liability company with its principal place of business in California. (Dkt. 1 ¶¶ 3-4.) The citizenships of their members, however, are not _____________________________________________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No.: 8:23-cv-01265-FWS-DFM Date: September 25, 2023 Title: Bohbot LLC v. Entrepreneur Consulting Services, LLC alleged. Accordingly, it appears complete diversity of the parties is inadequately alleged. See Johnson, 437 F.3d at 899.

Accordingly, the court ORDERS Defendants to show cause in writing no later than October 3, 2023, why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Failure to respond by the above date will result in the Court dismissing this action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) (“If the court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action.”).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Strawbridge v. Curtiss
7 U.S. 267 (Supreme Court, 1806)
Carden v. Arkoma Associates
494 U.S. 185 (Supreme Court, 1990)
James Harris v. Lee Rand
682 F.3d 846 (Ninth Circuit, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Steve Molino v. Volvo Car USA LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/steve-molino-v-volvo-car-usa-llc-cacd-2023.