Anna Andrews v. General Motors LLC

Filing 12

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE. LACK OF SUBJECT-MATTER JURISDICTION by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: Plaintiff Andrews to SHOW CAUSE in writing by Tuesday, July 8, 2014, why the Court should not dismiss her action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. No hearing will be held; Andrews shall respond in writing. Failure to timely respond will result in dismissal for lack of prosecution. (lc)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

United States District Court
Central District of California

9
10
11
12

ANNA ANDREWS, individually and on

13

behalf of all other similarly situated,
Plaintiff,

14
15
16
17

v.

Case No. 5:14-cv-01239-ODW(AJWx)
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE.
LACK OF SUBJECT-MATTER

GENERAL MOTORS LLC,

JURISDICTION

Defendant.

18

On June 18, 2014, Plaintiff Anna Andrews filed this putative class-action

19

lawsuit against Defendant General Motors LLC, ostensibly invoking jurisdiction

20

under the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d).

21

jurisdiction only applies when, among other things, “any member of a class of

22

plaintiffs is a citizen of a State different from any defendant.” Id. § 1332(d)(2)(A).

23

Andrews alleges that General Motors is incorporated in Delaware and has its principal

24

place of business in Detroit, Michigan. (Compl. ¶ 32.)

CAFA

25

But this allegation misstates the citizenship rules for limited-liability

26

companies. LLCs are citizens of all states in which their members are citizens—not

27

where they are organized and have their principal place of business. Johnson v.

28

Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006). The Court

1

therefore cannot adequately determine whether it has subject-matter jurisdiction over

2

this action until it knows the citizenship of General Motors’ members.

3

The Court therefore ORDERS Andrews to SHOW CAUSE in writing by

4

Tuesday, July 8, 2014, why the Court should not dismiss her action for lack of

5

subject-matter jurisdiction.

6

writing. Failure to timely respond will result in dismissal for lack of prosecution.

7

No hearing will be held; Andrews shall respond in

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8
9

June 24, 2014

10
11
12

____________________________________
OTIS D. WRIGHT, II
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2