Welk Resort Group, Inc. et al v. Reed Hein & Associates, LLC et al

Filing 4

ORDER DISMISSING Complaint with Leave to Amend for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction. If Plaintiffs choose to file an amended complaint, they must do so no later than August 11, 2017. Signed by Judge M. James Lorenz on 7/26/2017.(sjt)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WELK RESORT GROUP, INC. et al., Case No.: 17cv1499-L(AGS) Plaintiffs, 12 13 v. 14 ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND REED HEIN &ASSOCIATES, LLC, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 In this action arising from alleged violations of California Vacation Ownership and Time-Share Act and related claims, Plaintiffs claim federal jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship under 28 U.S.C. §1332. (Compl. at 7.) Because the complaint does not sufficiently allege citizenship of all the parties, the action is dismissed with leave to amend. Unlike state courts, Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. They possess only that power authorized by Constitution and statute, which is not to be expanded by judicial decree. It is to be presumed that a cause lies outside this limited jurisdiction, and the burden of establishing the contrary rests upon the party asserting jurisdiction. 28 1 17cv1499-L(AGS) 1 Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994) (citations omitted). 2 Federal courts are constitutionally required to raise issues related to federal subject matter 3 jurisdiction and may do so sua sponte. Arbaugh v. Y&H Corp., 546 U.S. 500, 514 4 (2006). A federal court must satisfy itself of its jurisdiction over the subject matter 5 before proceeding to the merits of the case. Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co., 526 U.S. 6 574, 577, 583 (1999). 7 The plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating that jurisdiction is properly before 8 the Court. See Thornhill Publ'g Co. v. General Tel. & Elec. Corp., 594 F.2d 730, 733 9 (9th Cir. 1979). Plaintiffs rely on 28 U.S.C. §1332, which requires complete diversity of 10 citizenship between plaintiffs and defendants. The complaint must affirmatively allege 11 the state of citizenship of each party. Bautista v. Pan Am. World Airlines, Inc., 828 F.2d 12 546, 552 (9th Cir.1987); see also Kanter v. Warner-Lambert, Co., 265 F.3d 853 (9th Cir. 13 2001). 14 The complaint names Welk Resort Group, Inc. and Welk Resort Platinum Owners 15 Association as Plaintiffs, and Reed & Hein Associates, LLC dba Timeshare Exit Team, 16 Schroeter Goldmark & Bender P.S., and Ken B. Privett, PLC as Defendants. For 17 diversity purposes, the citizenship of a corporation is determined by its state of 18 incorporation and the state of its principal place of business. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c). The 19 citizenship of a non-corporate business entity is determined by the citizenship of each of 20 its members. Carden v. Arkoma Assoc., 494 U.S. 185, 195-96 (1990). Except for Welk 21 Resort Group, Inc., Plaintiffs do not adequately allege the citizenship of any named party. 22 (See Compl. at 6-7.) In addition, Plaintiffs do not state whether Schroeter Goldmark & 23 Bender P.S., and Ken B. Privett, PLC are corporations or non-corporate entities. The 24 complaint is insufficient to establish that the parties meet all the requirements of diversity 25 jurisdiction. 26 Because Plaintiffs do not allege the facts necessary to establish diversity, the 27 complaint is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiffs are granted leave 28 to file an amended complaint to supplement the jurisdictional allegations. See 28 U.S.C. 2 17cv1499-L(AGS) 1 §1653. If Plaintiffs choose to file an amended complaint, they must do so no later than 2 August 11, 2017. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 5 Dated: July 26, 2017 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 17cv1499-L(AGS)

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?