M&L Foods, Inc. v. VCG Holding Corp. et al

Filing 4

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that plaintiff file an amended complaint correcting defects. Should it fail to do so, the Court will dismiss this matter for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 6/22/2011. (dka, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
M & L FOODS, INC.,
a Missouri Corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.
VCG HOLDING CORP.,
a Colorado corporation, and
RICHARD SAGGIO, INC.,
an Illinois Corporation,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 11-cv-537-JPG-SCW

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on its own initiative for purposes of case
management. Specifically, the Court questions whether it has jurisdiction over this matter.
Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. They may exercise jurisdiction only
over matters authorized by the Constitution and by statute. Turner/Ozanne v. Hyman/Power,
111 F.3d 1312, 1316 (7th Cir. 1997). Moreover, federal courts must police the boundaries of
their own jurisdiction. Even absent an objection by a party challenging jurisdiction, they are
“obliged to inquire sua sponte whenever a doubt arises as to the existence of federal
jurisdiction.” Tylka v. Gerber Prods. Co., 211 F.3d 445, 448-49 (7th Cir. 2000) (quoting Mt.
Healthy City Bd. of Educ. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274, 278 (1977)). As such, this Court conducts a
rigorous initial review of complaints to ensure that jurisdiction has been properly pled.
In its Complaint (Doc. 2), Plaintiff has invoked but not properly pled diversity of
citizenship as a basis for federal jurisdiction. Federal courts have jurisdiction over a civil action
between citizens of different states. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1) (2006). “For the purposes of [§
1332(c)] . . . , a corporation shall be deemed a citizen of any State by which it has been

incorporated and of the State where it has its principal place of business[.]” Se. Guar. Trust Co.,
Ltd. v. Rodman & Renshaw, Inc., 358 F. Supp. 1001, 1005-1006 (N.D. Ill. 1973) (emphasis
added). Here, Plaintiff has not alleged the principal place of business of Defendants.
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to file an amended complaint correcting these
and any other jurisdictional defects by July 1, 2011. See Tylka, 211 F.3d at 448 (“[I]t is not the
court’s obligation to lead counsel through a jurisdictional paint-by-numbers scheme.”). Should it
fail to do so, the Court will dismiss this matter for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 22, 2011
s/ J. Phil Gilbert
J. PHIL GILBERT
DISTRICT JUDGE

2