FIELDEN v. MACQUARIE OFFICE MONUMENT CENTER I, LLC et al

Filing 48

ORDER denying Defts' 47 Motion for Reconsideration. This ruling, of course, does not end this litigation, but merely sends it back to state court, which is Plaintiff's forum of choice (see Order for additional information). Signed by Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker on 9/17/2012. (SWM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

SHERRY FIELDEN,
Plaintiff,
vs.
MACQUARIE OFFICE MONUMENT
CENTER I, LLC et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:12-cv-0288-TAB-SEB

ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
Defendants seek reconsideration of the order remanding this case to state court. The
Court remanded this case because Defendants’ second supplemental notice of removal failed to
allege the place of incorporation and principal place of business for Macquarie Office Trust
Services, Inc. Defendants contend that “their previous submission could have been more clear . .
. , but for the superfluous information contained within their Motion, they have complied with
this Court’s previous requests and submitted the place of incorporation and principal place of
business for Macquarie Office Trust Services, Inc.” [Docket No. 47 at 1–2.]
Defendants’ attempt to clarify their allegations by asserting that their jurisdictional
statement should have read “Macquarie Office Trust Services, Inc. is managed by Macquarie
Office Management Limited, an Australian corporation with its principal place of business in
Sydney, Australia.” [Id. at 2.] According to Defendants, “but for the extraneous six (6) words . . .
this Honorable Court possessed the requisite information for purposes of determining whether
complete diversity was established . . . .” [Id.] The Court disagrees.
Removing those six words creates an entirely different meaning and modifies Macquarie
1

Office Trust Services, Inc. rather than Macquarie Office Management Limited. Thus, those six
words are not simply superfluous or extraneous, but directly assert that Macquarie Office
Management Limited’s principal place of business is in Australia. Moreover, removing those
words does not cure Defendants’ failure to set forth Macquarie Office Trust Services, Inc.’s
place of incorporation.
Defendants belatedly assert that “Macquarie Office Trust Services, Inc., is an
Australian corporation, incorporated in New South Wales in 1993, with its principal
place of business in Sydney, Australia.” [Id.] However, Defendants had three opportunities to
provide this information and failed to do so even though the Court expressly asked for the
information. The Court warned Defendants that this case would be remanded to state court if
they did not fix their jurisdictional problems. Despite correcting jurisdictional problems related
to the limited liability companies, Defendants ignored the Court’s discussion regarding
Macquarie Office Trust Services, Inc. It is simply too late to provide this information. Moro v.
Shell Oil Co., 91 F.3d 872, 876 (7th Cir. 1996) (explaining that motions for reconsideration “do
not provide a vehicle for a party to undo its own procedural failures, and it certainly does not
allow a party to introduce new evidence or advance arguments that could and should have been
presented to the district court prior to the judgment.”); Am.’s Best Inns, Inc. v. Best Inns of
Abilene, L.P., 980 F.2d 1072, 1074 (7th Cir. 1992) (“At some point the train of opportunities
ends. [Failure to] “supply the court with essential details supports an inference that jurisdiction is
absent . . . .”).

2

Defendants’ motion for reconsideration [Docket No. 47] is therefore denied. This ruling,
of course, does not end this litigation, but merely sends it back to state court, which is Plaintiff’s
forum of choice.
Dated: 09/17/2012
_______________________________
Tim A. Baker
United States Magistrate Judge
Southern District of Indiana

3

Copies to:
Christina Marie Alexander
KIGHTLINGER & GRAY
[e-mail]
Bruce P. Clark
BRUCE P. CLARK & ASSOCIATES
[e-mail]
Jennifer E. Davis
BRUCE P. CLARK & ASSOCIATES
[e-mail]
Nicholas Ward Levi
KIGHTLINGER & GRAY
[e-mail]
Jeffrey Alan Musser
ROCAP MUSSER LLP
[e-mail]
Christopher P. Phillips
BRUCE P. CLARK & ASSOCIATES
[e-mail]
Peter H. Pogue
SCHULTZ & POGUE LLP
[e-mail]
James William Roehrdanz
KIGHTLINGER & GRAY
[e-mail]

4