Wathen v. Mammoth Moving and Storage

D. Nevada

Wathen v. Mammoth Moving and Storage

DecidedApril 17, 2023

Docket2:23-cv-00504

StatusUnknown

This text of Wathen v. Mammoth Moving and Storage (Wathen v. Mammoth Moving and Storage) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Nevada primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wathen v. Mammoth Moving and Storage, (D. Nev. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

* * * 3 KATHLEEN WATHEN, an individual, Case No. 2:23-cv-00504-APG-DJA 4 Plaintiff, ORDER REGARDING JURISDICTION 5 v.

6 MAMMOTH MOVING AND STORAGE, a California Limited Liability Company; IAT 7 INSURANCE GROUP, a North Carolina Corporation; and TRANSGUARD 8 GENERAL INSURANCE AGENCY, INC., an Oklahoma Corp.,

9 Defendants.

11 Kathleen Wathen filed this case in federal court, apparently invoking this court’s 12 diversity jurisdiction as no federal statute or constitutional provision is cited in the complaint. 13 The party invoking this court’s jurisdiction has the burden of proving that this court may 14 properly assert jurisdiction over the parties and dispute. In her complaint, Wathen alleges that 15 defendant Mammoth Moving & Storage is a limited liability company licensed to do business in 16 California. ECF No. 2 at 1. However, “an LLC is a citizen of every state of which its 17 owners/members are citizens.” Johnson v. Columbia Properties Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 18 899 (9th Cir. 2006). See also Mills 2011 LLC v. Synovus Bank, 921 F. Supp. 2d 219, 220-21 19 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) (“In the case of a limited liability company, such citizenship [for purposes of 20 diversity jurisdiction] is determined by the citizenship of natural persons who are members of the 21 limited liability company and the place of incorporation and principal place of business of any 22 corporate entities that are members of the limited liability company.”). 23 Wathen has not provided the identity and citizenship of the members of Mammoth. Therefore, I cannot determine whether the requirements of diversity jurisdiction are met. 1 I HEREBY ORDER that, by May 11, 2023, Wathen must file with the court sufficient proof and explanation of the citizenship of every member of Mammoth Moving & Storage so I may evaluate whether the court has jurisdiction over this case. If Wathen needs to conduct 4|| jurisdictional discovery, she must explain why. 5 Dated: April 17, 2023. 6 G ANDREW P. GORDON 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

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

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

* * * 3 KATHLEEN WATHEN, an individual, Case No. 2:23-cv-00504-APG-DJA 4 Plaintiff, ORDER REGARDING JURISDICTION 5 v.

6 MAMMOTH MOVING AND STORAGE, a California Limited Liability Company; IAT 7 INSURANCE GROUP, a North Carolina Corporation; and TRANSGUARD 8 GENERAL INSURANCE AGENCY, INC., an Oklahoma Corp.,

9 Defendants.

11 Kathleen Wathen filed this case in federal court, apparently invoking this court’s 12 diversity jurisdiction as no federal statute or constitutional provision is cited in the complaint. 13 The party invoking this court’s jurisdiction has the burden of proving that this court may 14 properly assert jurisdiction over the parties and dispute. In her complaint, Wathen alleges that 15 defendant Mammoth Moving & Storage is a limited liability company licensed to do business in 16 California. ECF No. 2 at 1. However, “an LLC is a citizen of every state of which its 17 owners/members are citizens.” Johnson v. Columbia Properties Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 18 899 (9th Cir. 2006). See also Mills 2011 LLC v. Synovus Bank, 921 F. Supp. 2d 219, 220-21 19 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) (“In the case of a limited liability company, such citizenship [for purposes of 20 diversity jurisdiction] is determined by the citizenship of natural persons who are members of the 21 limited liability company and the place of incorporation and principal place of business of any 22 corporate entities that are members of the limited liability company.”). 23 Wathen has not provided the identity and citizenship of the members of Mammoth. Therefore, I cannot determine whether the requirements of diversity jurisdiction are met. 1 I HEREBY ORDER that, by May 11, 2023, Wathen must file with the court sufficient proof and explanation of the citizenship of every member of Mammoth Moving & Storage so I may evaluate whether the court has jurisdiction over this case. If Wathen needs to conduct 4|| jurisdictional discovery, she must explain why. 5 Dated: April 17, 2023. 6 G ANDREW P. GORDON 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Wathen v. Mammoth Moving and Storage, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wathen-v-mammoth-moving-and-storage-nvd-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack