Kaufman v. Warner Bros. Entertainment Incorporated et al

Filing 29

ORDER: IT IS ORDERED that by February 23, 2017, Plaintiff shall file a supplement to the original complaint properly alleging diversity jurisdiction at the time the case was filed, or this case will be dismissed for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction [see attached Order for details]. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 2/16/17. (MAW)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

David Kaufman,
Plaintiff,

10
11

ORDER

v.

12

No. CV-16-02248-PHX-JAT

Warner Bros. Entertainment Incorporated,
et al.,

13

Defendants.

14
15

“Inquiring whether the court has jurisdiction is a federal judge’s first duty in every

16

case.” Belleville Catering Co. v. Champaign Market Place, L.L.C., 350 F.3d 691, 693

17

(7th Cir. 2003). Further, the Court must assess its subject matter jurisdiction at the time

18

the complaint filed. See Grupo Dataflux v. Atlas Global Group, L.P., 541 U.S. 567, 570-

19

71 (2004).

20

Here, the original complaint (Doc. 1) fails to sufficiently plead jurisdiction.

21

Specifically, it fails to allege a principal place of business for any of the six Defendant

22

corporations. See Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 559 U.S. 77, 80, 92-93 (2010) (discussing the

23

citizenship of a corporation).
Accordingly,

24
25

///

26

///

27

///

28

///

1

IT IS ORDERED that by February 23, 2017, Plaintiff shall file a supplement to

2

the original complaint properly alleging diversity jurisdiction at the time the case was

3

filed, or this case will be dismissed for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction.

4

Dated this 16th day of February, 2017.

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

-2-