SWCC, LLC v. Allied National, Inc.

Filing 5

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Defendant is ordered to show cause why this case should not be remanded to the District Court of Sedgwick County for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Show Cause Response due by 4/5/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Teresa J. James on 3/16/2018. (ts)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
SWCC, LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
ALLIED NATIONAL, INC.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 18-cv-1086-EFM-TJJ

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
In its Notice of Removal (ECF No. 1), Defendant asserts removal is proper because this
court has subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s Petition (ECF No. 1-1) under the federal
question provision contained in 28 U.S.C. § 1331. According to Defendant, Plaintiff’s claim
against Defendant is “based upon and governed by ERISA.”1 Plaintiff alleges Defendant
breached an Administrative Services Agreement the parties entered into on July 1, 2016 for
administration of Plaintiff’s self-insured health plan. Because the plan is an ERISA plan,
Defendant asserts that “Plaintiff’s claim against Allied should be characterized as a claim under
one of the subsections of 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a).”2
ERISA Section 502(a), 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a), primarily acts to allow a participant or
beneficiary in an ERISA plan to bring an action for benefits. It also permits participants,
beneficiaries, and the Secretary of Labor to file actions against ERISA fiduciaries for breach of

1

ECF No. 1 at 2.

2

Id.

fiduciary duty, as well as other designated equitable claims. It does not authorize suit by an
ERISA plan for breach of contract of an agreement outside the plan.
Courts may exercise jurisdiction only when specifically authorized to do so, and must
dismiss the cause at any time it becomes apparent that jurisdiction is lacking.3 Because federal
courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, the law imposes a presumption against jurisdiction.4 The
party invoking federal jurisdiction bears the burden of showing jurisdiction is proper, and must
demonstrate that the case should not be dismissed or removed.5 Conclusory allegations of
jurisdiction are not enough.6
Accordingly, Defendant is hereby required to show good cause in writing to the
Honorable Eric F. Melgren, United States District Judge, within twenty (20) days of the date of
this order, why this case should not be remanded to the District Court of Sedgwick County for
lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated in Kansas City, Kansas on this 16th day of March, 2018.

Teresa J. James
U. S. Magistrate Judge

3

Scheideman v. Shawnee Cty. Bd of Cty. Comm’rs, 895 F. Supp. 279, 281 (D. Kan. 1995); Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).

4

Marcus v. Kan. Dep’t of Revenue, 170 F.3d 1305, 1309 (10th Cir. 1999).

5

Jensen v. Johnson Cty. Youth Baseball League, 838 F. Supp. 1437, 1439-40 (D. Kan. 1993).

6

Gonzalez v. Pepsico, Inc., 489 F. Supp. 2d 1233, 1237 (D. Kan. 2007).

2