Continental Credit Corporation v. Garcia, 15-cv-1251-NYW. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Colorado
Number: infdco20160314813
Visitors: 4
Filed: Mar. 11, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 11, 2016
Summary: ORDER NINA Y. WANG , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on Plaintiffs' Response to Order to Show Cause and Request to Dismiss Remaining Unjust Enrichment Claim Without Prejudice for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction. [#45, filed Mar. 8, 2016]. Plaintiffs represent that their remaining claim in this case for unjust enrichment against Defendant Paul C. Garcia does not satisfy the $75,000 amount in controversy requirement to establish diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.
Summary: ORDER NINA Y. WANG , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on Plaintiffs' Response to Order to Show Cause and Request to Dismiss Remaining Unjust Enrichment Claim Without Prejudice for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction. [#45, filed Mar. 8, 2016]. Plaintiffs represent that their remaining claim in this case for unjust enrichment against Defendant Paul C. Garcia does not satisfy the $75,000 amount in controversy requirement to establish diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S..
More
ORDER
NINA Y. WANG, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on Plaintiffs' Response to Order to Show Cause and Request to Dismiss Remaining Unjust Enrichment Claim Without Prejudice for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction. [#45, filed Mar. 8, 2016].
Plaintiffs represent that their remaining claim in this case for unjust enrichment against Defendant Paul C. Garcia does not satisfy the $75,000 amount in controversy requirement to establish diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. [#45 at ¶ 5]. Plaintiffs therefore request that the court dismiss Plaintiffs' remaining unjust enrichment claim without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. [#45 at ¶ 5].
On the basis of the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that:
(1) As previously set forth in the court's Memorandum Opinion and Order [#42], Plaintiffs' claim for relief for breach of contract has been DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;
(2) Plaintiffs' claim for unjust enrichment is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; and
(3) The case is dismissed in its entirety and the Clerk of the Court is directed to CLOSE the case.
Source: Leagle
