Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

COGNOTION, INC. v. GRACE HILL, LLC, CV 115-201. (2016)

Court: District Court, S.D. Georgia Number: infdco20160120957 Visitors: 5
Filed: Jan. 19, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 19, 2016
Summary: ORDER J. RANDAL HALL , District Judge . Plaintiff Cognotion, Inc. initiated this action on December 17, 2015. On January 12, 2016, Defendant Grace Hill, LLC filed a redacted answer and counterclaim, moved to seal Plaintiff's complaint and for leave to file certain documents under seal, and moved for a preliminary injunction. (Docs. 6, 7.) Since then, Defendant has realized that subject-matter jurisdiction may not exist in this case and has moved to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction
More

ORDER

Plaintiff Cognotion, Inc. initiated this action on December 17, 2015. On January 12, 2016, Defendant Grace Hill, LLC filed a redacted answer and counterclaim, moved to seal Plaintiff's complaint and for leave to file certain documents under seal, and moved for a preliminary injunction. (Docs. 6, 7.) Since then, Defendant has realized that subject-matter jurisdiction may not exist in this case and has moved to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction and to seal the entire case. (Doc. 18.)

Specifically, regarding the lack of jurisdiction, Defendant asserts that Plaintiff's complaint pleads Defendant's citizenship as a Georgia limited liability company with its principal place of business in Georgia. Defendant correctly points out that, for purposes of diversity jurisdiction, "a limited liability company is a citizen of any state of which a member of the company is a citizen." Rolling Greens MHP, LP v. Comcast SCH Holdings, LLC, 374 F.3d 1020, 1022 (11th Cir. 2004). Plaintiff's complaint pleads its own citizenship as a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in New York, which would make it a citizen of both of those states for diversity purposes. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c). Defendant has now produced evidence indicating that its sole member is a Delaware corporation, which would mean that the parties are not diverse. Accordingly, Defendant asks that the Court dismiss this case. It also requests that the case be sealed to avoid confidential information remaining on the docket. The Court is hesitant to fully grant either of these requests without allowing Plaintiff time to respond. The Court will, however, order the complaint sealed pending the resolution of these issues. The Clerk is ORDERED to SEAL the complaint in this case.

ORDER ENTERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer