Bryan Tidwell v. Biomet Orthopedics LLC et al

Filing 5

(IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE SUBJECT MATTER JURSIDICTION by Judge John A Kronstadt. Response to Order to Show Cause due by 8/29/2012. (vdr)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No.

LA CV12-06513 JAK (AJWx)

Title

Bryan Tidwell v. Biomet Orthopedics, LLC, et al.

Present: The Honorable

Date

August 15, 2012

JOHN A. KRONSTADT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Andrea Keifer

Not Reported

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter / Recorder

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:

Attorneys Present for Defendants:

Not Present

Not Present

Proceedings:

(IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE SUBJECT MATTER
JURISDICTION

In his Complaint, Dkt. 1, Plaintiff Bryan Tidwell brings four state law claims against Defendants Biomet
Orthopedics, LLC; Biomet, Inc.; and Biomet, LLC: (1) strict products liability, (2) negligence, (3) breach
of implied warranties, and (4) breach of express warranty. Plaintiff’s claims arise from an allegedly
“defective hip implant system.” Compl. ¶ 1.
As a court of limited jurisdiction, see Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377
(1994), this Court must determine the issue of subject matter jurisdiction before reaching the merits of a
case, see Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env’t., 523 U.S. 83, 94 (1998). Plaintiff seeks to invoke the
subject matter jurisdiction of this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (diversity jurisdiction).
Diversity jurisdiction exists only where a civil action is between citizens of different states, and the
amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Complete diversity of citizenship is
required: “the citizenship of each plaintiff [must be] different from that of each defendant.” Hunter v.
Philip Morris USA, 582 F.3d 1039, 1043 (9th Cir. 2009). A corporation is a citizen of its state of
incorporation and the state of its principal place of business. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c); Breitman v. May Co.
Cal., 37 F.3d 562, 564 (9th Cir. 1994). An LLC is the citizen of all states of which its members are
citizens. Johnson v. Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 902 (9th Cir. 2006).
Plaintiff alleges that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. Compl. ¶ 26. Plaintiff alleges that he
is a citizen of California, Compl. ¶ 4, and that Defendant Biomet, Inc. is a corporation incorporated in,
and with its principal place of business in, Indiana. Compl. ¶ 6. However, Plaintiff has not adequately
alleged the citizenship of Defendants Biomet Orthopedics, LLC, and Biomet, LLC. Plaintiff alleges that
each is a “limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of the State of Indiana with its
primary place of business in Warsaw, Indiana.” Compl. ¶¶ 5, 7. Plaintiff has not pleaded the citizenship
of Defendants’ members. Accordingly, Plaintiff has not adequately pleaded that complete diversity
exists.
The party seeking to establish the Court’s jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing it. Kokkonen,
511 U.S. at 377. Here, because Plaintiff has not properly pleaded the citizenship of two Defendants, he
CV-90 (10/08)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No.

LA CV12-06513 JAK (AJWx)

Date

Title

August 15, 2012

Bryan Tidwell v. Biomet Orthopedics, LLC, et al.

has not established diversity jurisdiction. Accordingly, the Court issues this Order to Show Cause re
Subject Matter Jurisdiction. On or before August 29, 2012, the parties are to submit any memoranda,
each of which is not to exceed five pages, with respect to whether this Court has subject matter
jurisdiction over this action. Upon receiving these memoranda, the Court will determine whether a
hearing on any issue raised is necessary or if the matter can be addressed by the Court without a
hearing.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

:
Initials of Preparer

CV-90 (10/08)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

ak

Page 2 of 2