ORDER

DOCIA L. DALBY, Magistrate Judge.

The court sua sponte notes the potential insufficiency of the removing defendant's allegation of the citizenship of the parties as follows;

1. ____ A party invoking diversity jurisdiction must allege the citizenship rather than mere residence of an individual. In addition, see 28 U.S.C. §1332(c)(2) for infants, minors and an incompetent. The citizenship of _______________ is not provided.

2. ____ A party invoking diversity jurisdiction must allege both the state of incorporation and principal place of business of each corporate party. See, e.g., Illinois Central Gulf Railroad Co. v. Pargas, Inc., 706 F.2d 633 (5th Cir. 1983). The state of incorporation and principal place of business of _______________ is not provided.1

3. X A party invoking diversity jurisdiction must allege both the state of incorporation and principal place of business of each corporate party. See, e.g., Illinois Central Gulf Railroad Co. v. Pargas, Inc., 706 F.2d 633 (5th Cir. 1983). Even when a liability insurer takes on its insured's citizenship under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1), its own citizenship still is considered in determining whether complete diversity exists. The state of incorporation and principal place of business of St. Paul Surplus Lines Insurance Company is not provided.2

4. X A party invoking diversity jurisdiction must properly allege the citizenship of a limited liability company. The citizenship of a limited liability company for diversity purposes is determined by the citizenship of its members. The citizenship of all of the members of a limited liability company must be properly alleged. In the event a member of a limited liability company is another limited liability company, the members of that limited liability company must be properly alleged as well. is See Harvey v. Grey Wolf Drilling Co., 542 F.3d 1077, 1080 (5th Cir. 2008). The removing defendant states that the members of Energy XXI GOM, LLC are Texas citizens, but does not identify the members of Energy XXI GOM, LLC.; therefore, the complete citizenship of Energy XXI GOM, LLC is not provided.

5. ____ A party invoking diversity jurisdiction must properly allege the citizenship of a general partnership and a limited liability partnership. For a general partnership, case law suggests that a partnership has the citizenship of each one of its partners. See International Paper Co. v. Denkmann Assoc., 116 F.3d 134, 137 (5th Cir. 1997). A limited liability partnership or L.L.P. also has the citizenship of each one of its partners, both general and limited. See Carden v. Arkoma Associates, 494 U.S. 185, 110 S.Ct. 1014, 108 L.Ed.2d 157 (1990). The citizenship of _____ is not provided.

6. ____ A party invoking diversity jurisdiction must properly allege the citizenship of Underwriters at Lloyd's, London. The citizenship of Underwriters at Lloyd's, London has not been provided. See Corfield v. Dallas Glen Hills LP, 355 F.3d 853 (5th Cir. 2003), cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1073, 124 S.Ct. 2421, 158 L.Ed.2d 983 (2004).

7. ____ A party invoking diversity jurisdiction must properly allege the citizenship of a sole proprietorship. A business entity cannot be both a corporation and sole proprietorship; therefore the court seeks to clarify the identity of plaintiff/defendant. Case law suggests that the citizenship of a sole proprietorship for diversity purposes is determined by the citizenship of its members and/or owners. See Linder Enterprises v. Martinringle, 2007 WL 3095382 (N.D. Tex.). The citizenship of _________ is not provided.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1653, that, on or before July 27, 2012, the removing defendant shall file an amended notice of removal providing the citizenship of defendants, Energy XXI GOM, LLC and St. Paul Surplus Lines Insurance Company, by setting forth all citizenship particulars required to sustain federal diversity jurisdiction.