Strategic Medical Equipment Solutions LLC v. Atlas Research LLC

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Raymond P. Moore

Civil Action No. 21-cv-00749-RM-KMT

STRATEGIC MEDICAL EQUIPMENT SOLUTIONS, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company,

Plaintiff,

v.

ATLAS RESEARCH, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,

Defendant. ______________________________________________________________________________

ORDER ______________________________________________________________________________

Defendant, a limited liability company, removed the above-captioned action to this court based on diversity jurisdiction. In doing so, Defendant alleged that one of its members was a trust (“Trust”) whose sole trustee was a Texas “resident.” But, without further information concerning the Trust, e.g., the type of trust and the law applicable to the Trust, the Court was unable to determine whose citizenship should be considered in assessing diversity jurisdiction. Therefore, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause (ECF No. 15). Defendant has now responded (the “Response”). (ECF No. 18.) Defendant’s Response advises, with supporting documentation, that the Trust is a “traditional” trust, governed under Virginia law, with Yono Suh as trustee. In addition, the papers show that Ms. Suh, in her capacity as trustee of the Trust, is a member of Defendant. Therefore, it is the citizenship of the trustee – Ms. Suh – who should be considered in determining diversity jurisdiction. See Americold Realty Tr. v. Conagra Foods, Inc., -- U.S. -- , 136 S. Ct. 1012, 1016, 194 L. Ed. 2d 71 (2016) (For a traditional trust, there is no need to determine its membership; the citizenship of the trustee is all that matters.). In this case, Defendant’s Notice alleges the residences of the various members of the LLCs. “An individual’s residence[, however,] is not equivalent to his domicile and it is domicile that is relevant for determining citizenship.” Siloam Springs Hotel, L.L.C. v. Century Sur. Co., 781 F.3d 1233, 1238 (10th Cir. 2015). Nonetheless, “under certain circumstances... proof that a person is a resident of a state may prima facie indicate that he 1s a citizen of that state.” Whitelock v. Leatherman, 460 F.2d 507, 514 n.14 (10th Cir. 1972). Here, in the Notice, Defendant alleged that Ms. Suh is a resident of Texas. The Response, however, represents that Ms. Suh is a citizen of Texas. And, upon review of Defendant’s allegations, arguments, and papers, it is apparent that when Defendant alleges residents, it also means citizens. Thus, on the current record, the Court finds sufficient support to show diversity jurisdiction exists. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Order to Show Cause (ECF No. 15) is DISCHARGED. DATED this 9th day of April, 2021. BY THE COURT:

United States District Judge