Davis et al v. Aramark Corporation et al

Filing 13

ORDER: IT IS ORDERED that by August 29, 2017, Defendants shall file a supplement to the notice of removal properly alleging federal subject matter jurisdiction or this case will be remanded to state court. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 8/25/17. (MAW)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Gayla Davis and Rodney Davis,
Plaintiffss,

10
11

ORDER

v.

12

No. CV-17-08154-PCT-JAT

Aramark Corporation and Aramark Sports
and Entertainment Services LLC,

13

Defendants.

14
15

AInquiring 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). Here, Defendants removed the case based on diversity but failed to plead

18

the citizenship of the limited liability company as required by Johnson v. Columbia

19

Properties Anchorage, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006).

20

IT IS ORDERED that by August 29, 2017, Defendants shall file a supplement to

21

the notice of removal properly alleging federal subject matter jurisdiction or this case will

22

be remanded to state court.1

23

Dated this 25th day of August, 2017.

24
25
26
27
28

1

This is at least the second case in which counsel Johnson and Staudinger have
removed a case without making a good faith effort to correctly plead jurisdiction. See
CV 16-3101-PHX-JAT (Doc. 11). In the future the Court will consider remanding the
case without warning if counsel fails to allege jurisdiction in the notice of removal itself.