Houser Holdings CA, LLC v. Old Republic National Title Insurance Company

Filing 11

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DIVERSITY JURISDICTION. Signed by Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley on 1/28/2025. Show Cause Response due by 2/13/2025. (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/28/2025)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 HOUSER HOLDINGS CA, LLC, 7 Plaintiff, 8 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DIVERSITY JURISDICTION v. 9 United States District Court Northern District of California Case No. 24-cv-09508-JSC 10 OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, 11 Defendant. Re: Dkt. No. 1 12 13 Plaintiff Houser Holdings CA, LLC, brings insurance coverage claims against Old 14 Republic National Title Insurance Company (“Old Republic”). (Dkt. No. 1.)1 Plaintiff asserts the 15 Court has jurisdiction over this case under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 because there is complete diversity of 16 citizenship between the parties. (Id. ¶¶ 4-7.) The complaint alleges Plaintiff “is a California 17 limited liability company with its principal place of business in Willits, California.” (Id. ¶ 2.) The 18 complaint further alleges Old Republic “is a Florida corporation with its principal place of 19 business in Tampa, Florida.” (Id. ¶ 3.) 20 Because “an LLC is a citizen of every state in which its owners/members are citizens,” 21 Johnson v. Columbia Properties Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006), Plaintiff’s 22 state of incorporation and principal place of business are irrelevant to the question of diversity 23 jurisdiction. Therefore, Plaintiff does not properly allege diversity jurisdiction. No other basis for 24 federal subject matter jurisdiction is clear from the complaint. 25 Accordingly, on or before February 13, 2025, Plaintiff shall make a supplemental filing 26 setting forth the citizenship of each member of the LLC party. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life 27 28 Record citations are to material in the Electronic Case File (“ECF”); pinpoint citations are to the ECF-generated page numbers at the top of the documents. 1 1 Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994) (“Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. . . . It 2 is to be presumed that a cause lies outside this limited jurisdiction, and the burden of establishing 3 the contrary rests upon the party asserting jurisdiction.”) (cleaned up); see also Hertz Corp. v. 4 Friend, 559 U.S. 77, 94 (2010) (“Courts have an independent obligation to determine whether 5 subject-matter jurisdiction exists, even when no party challenges it.”). 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 28, 2025 8 9 JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY United States District Judge 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?