CDK Ventures, LLC v. Performance Shading Systems Inc. et al

Filing 29

MINUTE IN CHAMBERS by Judge Josephine L. Staton: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION by Judge Josephine L. Staton. Plaintiff to show cause in writing no later than June 2, 2017 why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Failure to respond by the above date will result in the Court dismissing this action. See document for further information. (dv)

____________________________________________________________________________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No. 8:17-cv-00397-JLS-KES
Date: May 26, 2017
Title: CDK Ventures, LLC v. Performance Shading Systems Inc. et al.
Present: Honorable JOSEPHINE L. STATON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Terry Guerrero
Deputy Clerk
ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF:

Not Present

N/A
Court Reporter
ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANT:

Not Present

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS
CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF
SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
The Court may raise the issue of subject matter jurisdiction at any time, sua
sponte. See U.S. Catholic Conference v. Abortion Rights Mobilization, 487 U.S. 72, 79
(1988). Generally, subject matter jurisdiction is based on the presence of complete
diversity between the parties, see 28 U.S.C. § 1332, or on the presence of an action
arising under federal law, see 28 U.S.C. § 1331. In the Ninth Circuit, “an LLC is a
citizen of every state of which its owners/members are citizens.” Johnson v. Columbia
Properties Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006); see Americold Realty Trust
v. Conagra Foods, Inc., 136 S. Ct. 1012, 1016 (2016) (“So long as . . . an entity is
unincorporated, we apply our ‘oft-repeated rule’ that it possesses the citizenship of all its
members.”).
Here, Plaintiff alleges federal subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
(Notice of Removal ¶ 9, Doc. 1.) Although Plaintiff alleges that it is a Delaware limited
liability company with its principal place of business in California (id. ¶ 3), Plaintiff does
not plead the citizenship of every owner or member of the company.
For the reasons set forth above, the Court ORDERS:
1) Plaintiff to show cause in writing no later than June 2, 2017 why this
action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Failure to respond by the above date will result in the Court dismissing
this action.
Initials of Preparer: tg
______________________________________________________________________________
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
1