Henao v. Hilton Grand Vacations Company, LLC

Filing 6

ORDER REGARDING SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION. Signed by JUDGE DERRICK K. WATSON on 12/7/2016. - Defendant HGVC is directed to file, by December 21, 2016, a jurisdictional statement clarifying its entity status, and, if appro priate, identifying the citizenship of its owners/members. If any owners/members of HGVC are themselves LLCs or limited partnerships ("LPs"), HGVC shall identify those LLCs and LPs and specify their citizenship as well. (ecs, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAI‘I

CIVIL NO. 16-00646 DKW-RLP

JOSE HENAO
Plaintiff,

ORDER REGARDING SUBJECT
MATTER JURISDICTION

vs.
HILTON GRAND VACATIONS
COMPANY, LLC, et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER REGARDING SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
On December 6, 2016, Defendant Hilton Grand Vacations Company, LLC
(“HGVC”) filed a Notice of Removal of the Complaint filed by Plaintiff Jose Henao
in Civil No. 16-1-2040-11 from the Circuit Court of the First Circuit, State of
Hawaii. The Notice of Removal asserts federal subject matter jurisdiction based
solely upon diversity of citizenship under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). See Notice of
Removal ¶¶ 3-6. Section 1332(a)(1) provides that “the district courts shall have
original jurisdiction of all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the
sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between . . . citizens
of different States.” In order to satisfy the requirements of Section 1332, there must
1

be complete diversity of citizenship between the opposing parties. Exxon Mobil
Corp. v. Allapattah Servs., Inc., 545 U.S. 546, 553 (2005) (“[Section] 1332 . . .
requir[es] complete diversity: In a case with multiple plaintiffs and multiple
defendants, the presence in the action of a single plaintiff from the same [s]tate as a
single defendant deprives the district court of original diversity jurisdiction over the
entire action.”); Kuntz v. Lamar Corp., 385 F.3d 1177, 1181 (9th Cir. 2004).
The Notice of Removal alleges that Plaintiff is a citizen of Hawaii. Notice of
Removal ¶ 4. The Notice of Removal states that complete diversity exists between
the parties because:
Defendant HGVC is a corporation organized and existing under
the laws of the State of Delaware. Defendant HGVC’s
corporate headquarters and thus, its princip[al] place of business,
was and continues to be in the State of Florida. . . . As such, for
the purposes of diversity jurisdiction, Defendant HGVC is
deemed to be a citizen of Florida.
Notice of Removal ¶ 5 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1) (“a corporation shall be
deemed to be a citizen of any State by which it has been incorporated and of the State
where it has its principal place of business. . . .”)).
“In cases where entities rather than individuals are litigants, diversity
jurisdiction depends on the form of the entity.” Johnson v. Columbia Props.
Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006). From what the Court can
discern based upon the Complaint and Notice of Removal, it is unclear whether

2

Defendant HGVC is a corporation, as alleged in the Notice of Removal and
Complaint, or, as its name suggests, a limited liability company (“LLC”). “[A]n
LLC is a citizen of every state of which its owners/members are citizens.” Johnson,
437 F.3d at 899. Thus, to establish diversity jurisdiction, if HGVC is an LLC, the
citizenship of all owners and/or members of the LLC must be alleged.1 Id. That
has not yet occurred.
As the removing party, HGVC bears the burden of establishing subject matter
jurisdiction. Nosie v. Ass’n of Flight Attendants – CWA, AFL-CIO, 722 F. Supp. 2d
1181, 1190 (D. Haw. 2010). The Court may address subject matter jurisdiction sua
sponte. Fiedler v. Clark, 714 F.2d 77, 78 (9th Cir. 1983); Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).
Based on the foregoing, Defendant HGVC is directed to file, by
December 21, 2016, a jurisdictional statement clarifying its entity status, and, if
appropriate, identifying the citizenship of its owners/members. If any
///

///

///

1

“By contrast, a corporation is a citizen only of (1) the state where its principal place of business is
located, and (2) the state in which it is incorporated.” Johnson, 437 F.3d at 899 (citing 28 U.S.C.
§ 1332(c)(1)).

3

owners/members of HGVC are themselves LLCs or limited partnerships (“LPs”),
HGVC shall identify those LLCs and LPs and specify their citizenship as well.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 7, 2016 at Honolulu, Hawai‘i.

Henao v. Hilton Grand Vacations Company, LLC; Civil No. 16-00646 DKW-RLP;
ORDER REGARDING SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

4