Tiffany Burton et al v. Nutribullet, L.L.C., et al

Filing 35

MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS) - ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge Dolly M. Gee. Plaintiffs are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing by October 23, 2017 why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. In order to be deemed adequate, Plaintiffs' response will need to provide the citizenship of each of Defendant Nutribullet, L.L.C.'s owners and/or members. (iv)

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

Date

CV 17-3358-DMG (AFMx)

Title Tiffany Burton, et al. v. Nutribullet, L.L.C., et al.
Present: The Honorable

October 16, 2017
Page

1 of 2

DOLLY M. GEE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

KANE TIEN
Deputy Clerk

NOT REPORTED
Court Reporter

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff(s)
None Present

Attorneys Present for Defendant(s)
None Present

Proceedings: IN CHAMBERS - ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS’ RESPONSE TO ORDER TO
SHOW CAUSE
On October 5, 2017, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause (“OSC”) why this action
should not be dismissed because of Plaintiffs’ failure to adequately plead jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1332(a), given that they had not alleged the citizenship of all of Defendant Nutribullet,
L.L.C.’s owners and/or members. [Doc. # 32.] On October 12, 2017, Plaintiffs’ counsel filed a
declaration in response to the OSC that does not supply the citizenship of Defendant’s members
and/or owners (“Lavine Decl.”). [Doc. # 34.] Rather, Plaintiffs’ counsel merely reiterates the
Complaint’s allegations that Defendant “is a Limited Liability Corporation (sic) with its principal
office in Los Angeles, California.”1 See Lavine Decl. at ¶ 7 (alteration in original) (quoting
Compl. at ¶ 2).
Plaintiffs bear the burden of pleading facts sufficient to establish this Court’s subject
matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(1). In the absence of any allegations or evidence on
the citizenship of Defendant Nutribullet, L.L.C.’s owners and/or members, the Court cannot
conclude that Plaintiffs have properly invoked its diversity jurisdiction. See Johnson v.
Columbia Props. Advantage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006) (“We . . . hold that, like a
partnership, an LLC is a citizen of every state of which its owners/members are citizens.”).
Nonetheless, Plaintiffs’ failure to allege complete diversity may be attributed solely to
their misunderstanding of the law. See Lavine Decl. at ¶ 14 (“In the event this declaration does
not satisfy the Court’s concerns regarding subject matter jurisdiction, Plaintiffs request
clarification from the Court regarding why complete diversity does not exist in this action.”).
Therefore, the Court will afford Plaintiffs one final opportunity to provide an adequate response
to the OSC. Plaintiffs are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing by October 23, 2017
why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. In order to be
1

The declaration clarifies that Defendant is a “California limited liability company with its principal office
in Los Angeles, California.” See Lavine Decl. at ¶ 6 (emphasis added).
CV-90

CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL

Initials of Deputy Clerk KT

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

CV 17-3358-DMG (AFMx)

Title Tiffany Burton, et al. v. Nutribullet, L.L.C., et al.

Date

October 16, 2017
Page

2 of 2

deemed adequate, Plaintiffs’ response will need to provide the citizenship of each of
Defendant Nutribullet, L.L.C.’s owners and/or members.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

CV-90

CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL

Initials of Deputy Clerk KT