Palmdale 3D, LLC v. Black Diamond Financial Group, LLC et al

Filing 10

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell. Plaintiff's allegations are insufficient to demonstrate complete diversity among the parties. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause as to why this case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. An appropriate response to this Order will: (1) identify each owner or member of Plaintiff and Black Diamond Defendants and allege their respective states of citizenshi p; (2) allege Defendant Patrick Imeson's state of domicile; and (3) allege Defendant Eastern Resources, Inc.'s principal place of business. Plaintiff's response to this Order shall be filed by no later than Tuesday, April 28, 2015, at 4:00 p.m. IT IS SO ORDERED. (jloz)

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

CV 15-02757 BRO (PLAx)

Title

PALMDALE 3D, LLC V. BLACK DIAMOND FINANCIAL GROUP, LLC ET AL.

Date

April 22, 2015

Present: The Honorable

BEVERLY REID O’CONNELL, United States District Judge

Renee A. Fisher

Not Present

N/A

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter

Tape No.

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:

Attorneys Present for Defendants:

Not Present

Not Present

Proceedings:

(IN CHAMBERS)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
Plaintiff Palmdale 3D, LLC (“Plaintiff”) initiated this action by filing a Complaint
in this Court on April 16, 2015. (Dkt. No. 2.) The Complaint does not specifically allege
any basis for federal court subject matter jurisdiction. (See generally Compl.) A federal
court must determine its own jurisdiction even if there is no objection. Rains v. Criterion
Sys., Inc., 80 F.3d 339, 342 (9th Cir. 1996). Because federal courts are of limited
jurisdiction, they possess original jurisdiction only as authorized by the Constitution and
federal statute. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377
(1994). Original jurisdiction may be established pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 or 1332.
Pursuant to § 1331, federal courts have jurisdiction over “all civil actions arising
under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 1331. A case
“arises under” federal law if a plaintiff’s “well-pleaded complaint establishes either that
federal law creates the cause of action” or that the plaintiff’s “right to relief under state
law requires resolution of a substantial question of federal law in dispute between the
parties.” Franchise Tax Bd. v. Constr. Laborers Vacation Trust for S. Cal., 463 U.S. 1,
13 (1983). Here, Plaintiff brings claims for breach of contract and fraud, both of which
arise under state law. Accordingly, the Court lacks jurisdiction under § 1331.
Jurisdiction under § 1332 requires that the amount in controversy exceed $75,000
and that the parties meet the complete diversity rule. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a); NewmanGreen, Inc. v. Alfonzo-Larrain, 490 U.S. 826, 829 (1989). For complete diversity to
exist, the plaintiff must be a citizen of a state different from the states of citizenship of all
the defendants. Newman-Green, 490 U.S. at 829. An individual is deemed to be a
citizen of his or her state of domicile. Lew v. Moss, 797 F.2d 747, 749–50 (9th Cir.
CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Page 1 of 2

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

CV 15-02757 BRO (PLAx)

Title

PALMDALE 3D, LLC V. BLACK DIAMOND FINANCIAL GROUP, LLC ET AL.

Date

April 22, 2015

1986). “[A] person is domiciled in a location where he or she has established a fixed
habitation or abode in a particular place, and intend[s] to remain there permanently or
indefinitely.” Id. (internal quotation marks and alterations omitted). A corporation is
deemed a citizen of any state in which it is incorporated and the state where it has its
principal place of business. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1). A limited liability company is
considered to be a citizen of every state of which its owners or members are citizens.
Johnson v. Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006).
After reviewing the Complaint, the Court finds that the allegations fail to
demonstrate complete diversity. Plaintiff alleges that it is a limited liability company
“organized under the laws of” and “conducting business” in the State of California.
(Compl. ¶ 1.) Plaintiff does not allege, however, the identity of its owners or members,
or the states of citizenship of those owners or members. Plaintiff’s allegations regarding
Defendants Black Diamond Financial Group, LLC and Black Diamond Holdings, LLC
(collectively, “Black Diamond Defendants”), both of whom are also alleged to be limited
liability companies, are similarly deficient. Although Plaintiff alleges that Defendant
Patrick Imeson “was the managing member of each Black Diamond entity,” (see id. ¶ 4),
this allegation does not clearly identify each of the members or owners of Black
Diamond Defendants and their respective states of citizenship at the time of filing.
Additionally, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Eastern Resources, Inc. is a Delaware
corporation, (see id. ¶ 3), but fails to allege the company’s principal place of business.
In sum, Plaintiff’s allegations are insufficient to demonstrate complete diversity
among the parties. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause as to why
this case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. An appropriate
response to this Order will: (1) identify each owner or member of Plaintiff and Black
Diamond Defendants and allege their respective states of citizenship; (2) allege
Defendant Patrick Imeson’s state of domicile; and (3) allege Defendant Eastern
Resources, Inc.’s principal place of business. Plaintiff’s response to this Order shall be
filed by no later than Tuesday, April 28, 2015, at 4:00 p.m.
:

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Initials of Preparer

rf

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Page 2 of 2