Bailey et al v. Depuy Orthopaedics, Inc. et al

Filing 2

ORDER to Amend 1 Complaint: IT IS ORDERED that pltf Mary Bailey shall have 14 days to file an amended complaint which properly alleges her citizenship and the citizenship of dft Johnson & Johnson International.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Riedlinger on 2/21/2012. (CMM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

MARY BAILEY
CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS
NUMBER 12-96-JJB-SCR
DEPUY ORTHOPAEDICS, INC., ET AL
ORDER TO AMEND COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Mary Bailey filed a Complaint alleging subject
matter

jurisdiction

citizenship.

under

28

U.S.C.

§

1332,

diversity

of

The Complaint names a defendants DePuy Orthopaedics,

Inc., DePuy International Limited, Johnson & Johnson Services,
Inc., Johnson & Johnson, and Johnson & Johnson International.
Plaintiff alleged that she “resides” in Louisiana. As to defendant
Johnson & Johnson International, the plaintiff alleged that it “is
a multi-national corporation also based in New Brunswick, New
Jersey.”1
When subject matter jurisdiction depends on citizenship, the
citizenship of each party must be distinctly and affirmatively
alleged in accordance with § 1332(a) and (c).2
Under § 1332(c)(1) a corporation is deemed to be a citizen of
every state in which it is incorporated and of the state in which

1

2

Record document number 1, ¶ 3.

Stafford v. Mobil Oil Corp., 945 F.2d 803, 804 (5th Cir.
1991), citing, McGovern v. American Airlines, Inc., 511 F.2d 653,
654 (5th Cir. 1975)(quoting 2A Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 8.10, at
1662).

it has its principal place of business.
Plaintiff’s allegation that she resides in Louisiana is not
equivalent to alleging that she is a citizen of Louisiana.

A

person may reside in one state, any yet be a citizen of a different
state. Although considering the other allegations in her Complaint
this is unlikely, the better practice is for the plaintiff to
alleged the state of her citizenship - which is the term used in §
1332.
Plaintiff’s

jurisdictional

allegation

regarding

defendant

Johnson & Johnson International is not sufficient for the court to
determine whether diversity jurisdiction exists. Plaintiff did not
allege the state where defendant Johnson & Johnson International is
incorporated nor where it has it’s principal place of business.
The allegation that Johnson & Johnson International is a subsidiary
of Johnson & Johnson, which is a New Jersey corporation with its
principal place of business in that state, suggests that Johnson &
Johnson International may also be a New Jersey corporation.

The

allegation that Johnson & Johnson International is “based” in New
Jersey, although too vague to satisfy § 1332, does suggest that New
Jersey is the state where it has its principal place of business.
While it is unlikely that Johnson & Johnson International would be
either incorporated or have its principal place of business in
Louisiana, the better practice is for the plaintiff to properly
allege

the

state

where

Johnson

2

&

Johnson

International

is

incorporated and has its principal place of business.
Therefore;
IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff Mary Bailey shall have 14 days to
file an amended complaint which properly alleges her citizenship
and the citizenship of defendant Johnson & Johnson International.
Failure

to

comply

with

this

order

may

result

in

the

plaintiff’s Complaint being dismissed for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction without further notice.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, February 21, 2012.

STEPHEN C. RIEDLINGER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3