Burge et al v. Freelife International, Inc.

Filing 6

ORDER that by 7/2/09, Plaintiffs shall file an amended complaint properly alleging federal subject matter jurisdiction, or this case will be dismissed without prejudice for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. Signed by Judge James A Teilborg on 6/12/09. (MAP)

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

David Lucas Burge; et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Freelife International, Inc., Defendant.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. CV 09-1159-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, Plaintiffs cite no statute in the complaint which they allege would give this Court jurisdiction. In fact, in the "jurisdiction" section of their complaint, they cite a state statute and a state rule of court, but no federal statute or federal rule. Because federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, the party asserting jurisdiction must plead sufficient facts for this Court to assess its jurisdiction. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994); Valdez v. Allstate, 372 F.3d 1115, 1116-17 (9th Cir. 2004). Therefore, /// /// ///

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

IT IS ORDERED that by July 2, 2009, Plaintiffs shall file an amended complaint properly alleging federal subject matter jurisdiction, or this case will be dismissed without prejudice for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. DATED this 12th day of June, 2009.

-2-