Gametech Intl v. Trend Gaming Systems

Filing 640

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re subject matter jurisdiction. Show Cause Response due by noon 12/5/2008. Signed by Judge James A Teilborg on 12/1/2008. (JAT)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

) ) Plaintiff/Counterdefendant, ) ) ) vs. ) ) ) Trend Gaming Systems, L.L.C., ) Defendant/Counterclaimant. ) ) ) GameTech International, Inc.,

No. CV 01-540-PHX-JAT ORDER

Pending before the Court is Trend Gaming System's, L.L.C.'s motion to reassign this case a Magistrate Judge. Before the undersigned considers this motion, this Court must undertake to ensure it has subject matter jurisdiction over this case. Belleville Catering Co. v. Champaign Market Place, L.L.C., 350 F.3d 691, 693 (7th Cir. 2003) ("Inquiring whether the court has jurisdiction is a federal judge's first duty in every case."). The Court has reviewed the Complaint (Doc. #1), Counterclaim (Doc. #5), Second Amended Complaint (Doc. #60), and First Amended Counterclaim (Doc. #66) in this case. All of these documents plead that jurisdiction in this case is based on diversity of citizenship. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332. However, none of these documents properly plead the citizenship of Trend Gaming System, L.L.C.1 See Johnson v. Columbia Properties Anchorage, L.P., 437

It is possible that this pleading defect is cured elsewhere in this record, as the undersigned has not undertaken to read every document previously filed in this case.

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006) (holding that limited liability companies are citizens of every state in which any member is a citizen). Because a complaint and counterclaim have been filed, both parties have invoked the jurisdiction of this Court. Thus, both parties have the burden of proving facts supporting jurisdiction. See Industrial Tectonics v. Aero Alloy, 912 F.2d 1090, 1092 (9th Cir. 1990). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that by noon, December 5, 2008, the parties shall file a joint jurisdictional statement in which they properly allege federal subject matter jurisdiction. If the parties fail to plead complete diversity sufficient to establish jurisdiction, this case will be dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction.2 DATED this 1st day of December, 2008.

Further, due to the age of this case, the parties must confirm the citizenship of each party, member, or entity as of the date the complaint was filed. -2-

2