Filed: May 05, 2016
Latest Update: May 05, 2016
Summary: ENTRY ON JURISDICTION TANYA WALTON PRATT , District Judge . It has come to the Court's attention that the Plaintiff's Complaint fails to allege all of the facts necessary to determine whether this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this case. The Complaint alleges that this Court has jurisdiction based upon diversity of citizenship. However, the Complaint fails to sufficiently allege the citizenship of two Defendants. Citizenship is the operative consideration for jurisdictional pu
Summary: ENTRY ON JURISDICTION TANYA WALTON PRATT , District Judge . It has come to the Court's attention that the Plaintiff's Complaint fails to allege all of the facts necessary to determine whether this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this case. The Complaint alleges that this Court has jurisdiction based upon diversity of citizenship. However, the Complaint fails to sufficiently allege the citizenship of two Defendants. Citizenship is the operative consideration for jurisdictional pur..
More
ENTRY ON JURISDICTION
TANYA WALTON PRATT, District Judge.
It has come to the Court's attention that the Plaintiff's Complaint fails to allege all of the facts necessary to determine whether this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this case. The Complaint alleges that this Court has jurisdiction based upon diversity of citizenship. However, the Complaint fails to sufficiently allege the citizenship of two Defendants. Citizenship is the operative consideration for jurisdictional purposes. See Meyerson v. Harrah's East Chicago Casino, 299 F.3d 616, 617 (7th Cir. 2002) ("residence and citizenship are not synonyms and it is the latter that matters for purposes of the diversity jurisdiction"). Additionally, "[f]or diversity jurisdiction purposes, the citizenship of an LLC is the citizenship of each of its members." Thomas v. Guardsmark, LLC, 487 F.3d 531, 534 (7th Cir. 2007). "Consequently, an LLC's jurisdictional statement must identify the citizenship of each of its members as of the date the complaint or notice of removal was filed, and, if those members have members, the citizenship of those members as well." Id.
The Plaintiff initiated this lawsuit by filing its Complaint, which alleges,
Defendant General Motors Holdings, LLC is and was at all relevant times a citizen of Michigan, incorporated under the laws of Delaware, with its principal place of business in Detroit, Michigan. Defendant General Motors Holdings, LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of General Motors Company. General Motors Company is and was at all relevant times a citizen of Michigan, incorporated under the laws of Delaware, with its principal place of business in Detroit, Michigan.
(Filing No. 1 at 2.) However, these allegations fail to identify Defendant General Motors Holdings, LLC's members and their citizenship.
Furthermore, the caption of the Complaint names Ryder Integrated Logistics, Inc. ("Ryder") as a defendant, but the Complaint contains no allegations regarding Ryder or its citizenship.
Therefore, the Plaintiff is ORDERED to file a Supplemental Jurisdictional Statement that establishes the Court's jurisdiction over this case. This statement should specifically identify each of the members of Defendant General Motors Holdings, LLC and their citizenship. This statement also should clarify whether Ryder is a defendant in this matter, and if so, identify the citizenship of Ryder. This Supplemental Jurisdictional Statement is due 14 days from the date of this Entry.
SO ORDERED.
