AKB Wireless, Inc. v. Wireless Toyz Franchise, LLC

Filing 4

ORDER dismissing case re 1 Complaint. Plaintiff's Complaint 1 is DISMISSED without prejudice. Plaintiff shall file an Amended Complaint properly alleging this Court's jurisdiction no later than April 10, 2014. Failure to comply with this Court's directive will result in this matter being closed. Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 3/28/2014. (LMF)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
AKB WIRELESS, INC., a Florida
corporation
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 2:14-cv-171-FtM-38CM

WIRELESS TOYZ FRANCHISE, LLC,
Defendant.
/
ORDER1
This matter comes before the Court on review of the Complaint (Doc. #1) filed
March 25, 2014. Plaintiff AKB Wireless, Inc. brings this cause against Defendant Wireless
Toyz Franchise, LLC based on diversity jurisdiction. Claims properly brought in federal
court pursuant to diversity jurisdiction contain matters where the parties are completely
diverse with regard to citizenship and where the amount in controversy exceeds the sum
or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a); Morrison v.
Allstate Indem. Co., 228 F.3d 1255, 1261 (11th Cir. 2000). In an action filed directly in
federal court, plaintiff bears the burden of adequately pleading, and ultimately proving,
jurisdiction. King v. Cessna Aircraft Co., 505 F.3d 1160, 1171 (11th Cir. 2007).
Based on the Complaint, the Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction
because Plaintiff fails to properly indicate Defendant’s citizenship. A limited liability

1

Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. These
hyperlinks are provided only for users’ convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in
CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other Web sites, this court does not endorse,
recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their Web
sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The court
accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink
ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.

company (hereinafter “LLC”) is a citizen of every state in which one of its members is
located. Moreno v. Breitburn Florida, LLC, No. 2:09-cv-566-FtM-29DNF, 2011 WL
2293124 at *1 (M.D. Fla. June 9, 2011) (citing Rolling Greens MHP, L.P. v. Comcast SCH
Holdings, LLC., 374 F.3d 1020 (11th Cir. 2004)). Each member of the LLC must be
diverse from the plaintiff in this case. Lincoln Prop. Co. v. Roche, 546 U.S. 81, 89, 126
S.Ct. 606, 163 L.Ed.2d 415 (2005) (“Since Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 3 Cranch 267, 2 L.Ed.
435, this Court has read the statutory formulation ‘between … citizens of different States,’
28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1), to require complete diversity between all plaintiffs and all
defendants.”). Since the Complaint does not properly indicate the Defendant’s citizenship
the Court finds it is without authority to facilitate this case at this time.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. #1) is DISMISSED without prejudice. Plaintiff shall file
an Amended Complaint properly alleging this Court’s jurisdiction no later than April 10,
2014. Failure to comply with this Court’s directive will result in this matter being closed.
DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 28th day of March, 2014.

Copies: All Parties of Record

2