Sandra Purol et al v. Mentor Worldwide LLC

Filing 5

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION by Magistrate Judge Ralph Zarefsky. Response to Order to Show Cause due by 3/26/2012. (See document for details). (ib)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SANDRA PUROL, ET AL.,

12
13
14
15
16

Plaintiffs,
vs.
MENTOR WORLDWIDE, LLC,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. CV 12-01960 RZ
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED
FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER
JURISDICTION

17

“Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. As such, ‘our power to

18

adjudicate claims is limited to that granted by Congress.’ Nieto v. Ecker, 845 F.2d 868,

19

871 (9th Cir. 1988). Unless a grant of jurisdiction over a particular case affirmatively

20

appears, we are presumed to lack jurisdiction.” National Treasury Employees Union v.

21

Federal Labor Relations Authority, 112 F.3d 402, 403 (9th Cir. 1997), citing General

22

Atomic Co. v. United Nuclear Corp., 655 F.2d 968, 968-69 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied,

23

455 U.S. 948, 102 S. Ct. 1449, 71 L. Ed. 2d 662 (1982).

24

The Complaint here grounds federal subject matter jurisdiction on diversity

25

of citizenship. Plaintiffs, two individuals, are alleged to be citizens of the State of

26

Michigan. The defendant is identified as Mentor Worldwide, LLC, and is alleged to be “a

27

Delaware limited liability company which has its principal place of business in Santa

28

1

Barbara, California.” Thus, Plaintiffs have pleaded the citizenship of the defendant as if

2

the defendant was a corporation.

3

However, the defendant is not a corporation, but a limited liability company,

4

and a limited liability company’s citizenship must be pleaded differently. As the Ninth

5

Circuit has held, “ . . . like a partnership, an LLC is a citizen of every state of which its

6

owners/members are citizens.” Johnson v. Columbia Properties Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d

7

894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006). Thus, Plaintiffs need to allege the citizenship of each of the

8

members of the defendant. Since Plaintiffs have not done so, jurisdiction does not

9

affirmatively appear.

10

Accordingly, Plaintiffs are ordered to show cause why their Complaint should

11

not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiffs shall show such cause

12

in writing not later than March 26, 2012. If, prior to that time, Plaintiffs file an amended

13

complaint curing the jurisdictional defect, the Court will vacate the Order to Show Cause.

14

IT IS SO ORDERED.

15
16

DATED: March 13, 2012

17
18
19
20

RALPH ZAREFSKY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-