ORDER

TIMOTHY D. DeGIUSTI, District Judge.

Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint [Doc. No. 10] is STRICKEN for failure to comply with the Court's order of September 4, 2018 [Doc. No. 9]. In that Order, the Court directed Plaintiff to file an amended complaint as its initial pleading failed to allege the location of its principal place of business and provide any information concerning Defendant's members. Id. at 2. In its amended complaint, although Plaintiff has identified Defendant's members, it again only states that it "is a Delaware corporation authorized to conduct business in the State of Oklahoma." See First Amend. Compl. ¶ 2. Since Plaintiff has failed to identify its principal place of business, its amended pleading remains deficient.

The Court does not direct Plaintiff to file an amended complaint for the sake of amendment. Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and the Court has the independent obligation to satisfy itself that subject matter jurisdiction is present. See Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp., 546 U.S. 500, 514 (2006); Image Software, Inc. v. Reynolds & Reynolds Co., 459 F.3d 1044, 1048 (10th Cir. 2006). Accordingly, Plaintiff shall file its amended complaint within seven (7) days of this order. Plaintiff's Motion for Order Sealing Exhibit 1 to Complaint and Directing the Filing of Redacted Document [Doc. No. 11] is GRANTED IN PART. The Court Clerk is directed to seal Exhibit 1 to Plaintiff's initial complaint [Doc. No. 1]. Plaintiff may file a redacted version of said exhibit to its amended complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.