Lincoln-Sky Harbor LLC v. Zhang et al

Filing 17

ORDER that by 10/15/08, Dfts Western Stone Supply, LLC, Shumin Zhang and Susan Tang shall file an amended notice of removal properly alleging federal subject matter jurisdiction, or this case will be remanded for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. That Dfts are cautioned that they will be given one opportunity to amend to cure the jurisdiction defects. Signed by Judge James A Teilborg on 10/02/08. (ESL)

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, ) ) vs. ) ) Shumin Zhang and Susan Tang; Linghui) Nie and Xinhua Li; Western Store Supply,) ) LLC, ) ) Defendants. ) ) Lincoln Sky Harbor, LLC,

No. CV 08-1620-PHX-JAT ORDER

"Inquiring whether the court has jurisdiction is a federal judge's first duty in every case." Belleville Catering Co. v. Champaign Market Place, L.L.C., 350 F.3d 691, 693 (7th Cir. 2003). In this case, the notice of removal fails to sufficiently plead jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332; Johnson v. Columbia Properties Anchorage, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that by October 15, 2008, Defendants Western Stone Supply, LLC, Shumin Zhang and Susan Tang (as the parties asserting jurisdiction and therefore, with the burden of pleading jurisdiction, see Industrial Tectonics v. Aero Alloy, 912 F.2d 1090, 1092 (9th Cir. 1990)) shall file an amended notice of removal properly alleging federal subject

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

matter jurisdiction, or this case will be remanded for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction.1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants are cautioned that they will be given one opportunity to amend to cure the jurisdiction defects. The Court will not issue additional sua sponte show cause orders to assist Defendants in pleading jurisdiction.2 Therefore, if the amended notice of removal fails to plead federal subject matter jurisdiction, this case will be remanded without the Court sua sponte granting Defendants any further opportunities to amend. DATED this 2nd day of October, 2008.

The amended notice of removal must contain all jurisdictional allegations sufficient to plead jurisdiction in one document and should not anticipate that the Court will read any previous filings to assess jurisdiction. See Harris v. Bankers Life and Casualty Co., 425 F.3d 689, 695-96 (9th Cir. 2005); Valdez v. Allstate, 372 F.3d 1115, 1117 (9th Cir. 2004). The Court should not give a party advice because advice, "would undermine district judges' role as impartial decision makers." See Pliler v. Ford, 542 U.S. 225, 231 (2004). -22

1