Klein v. Golfswitch Incorporated et al

Filing 9

ORDER - IT IS ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (See document for further details). Signed by Senior Judge Paul G Rosenblatt on 10/1/14. (LAD)

Download PDF
1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 10 Shari Klein, Plaintiff, 11 12 13 14 15 vs. Golfswitch, Inc., et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV-14-01679-PHX-PGR ORDER 16 In a complaint filed on July 25, 2014, the plaintiff alleged that the Court has 17 diversity of citizenship jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. In 18 an order (Doc. 8), entered on July 28, 2014, the Court dismissed the complaint for 19 lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the existence of diversity jurisdiction was 20 not evident from the face of the complaint inasmuch as the plaintiff had failed to 21 properly allege the citizenship of three of the four named parties. The Court 22 specifically informed the plaintiff in that order what the jurisdictional deficiencies 23 were, and required the plaintiff to file an amended complaint properly stating a 24 jurisdictional basis for this action no later than August 15, 2014. The Court further 25 informed the plaintiff that her failure to timely or sufficiently comply with the order 26 would result in the dismissal of this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. 1 A review of the Court’s docket record establishes that the plaintiff has to date 2 failed to comply with the Court’s order in any manner, i.e., she has not filed an 3 amended complaint, she has not sought an extension of time to do so, and she has 4 not communicated to the Court any inability on her part to comply with the order.1 5 Therefore, 6 7 8 IT IS ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. DATED this 1st day of October, 2014. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 1 The Court notes that the notice of electronic filing for its July 28th order shows that the order was sent to three different email addresses for the plaintiff’s counsel. -2-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?