Inspired Pharma Solutions, LLC v. 5MRX LLC et al

Filing 5

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, by June 27, 2017, defendants shall file an amended notice of removal in accordance with this memorandum, setting forth the members of each limited liability company party and the citizenship of each o f those members. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if defendants do not timely and fully comply with this order, this matter will be remanded for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all other proceedings in this case are STAYED pending further order of this Court. Response to Court due by 6/27/2017. Signed by District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 6/6/17. (CSG)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
INSPIRED PHARMA SOLUTIONS, LLC, )
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
5MRX LLC, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)

Case No. 4:17cv1621 SNLJ

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on review of the file following assignment to the
undersigned. The Eight Circuit has admonished district courts to “be attentive to a
satisfaction of jurisdictional requirements in all cases.” Sanders v. Clemco Indus., 823
F.2d 214, 216 (8th Cir. 1987). “In every federal case the court must be satisfied that it
has jurisdiction before it turns to the merits of other legal arguments.” Carlson v.
Arrowhead Concrete Works, Inc., 445 F.3d 1046, 1050 (8th Cir. 2006). “A plaintiff who
seeks to invoke diversity jurisdiction of the federal courts must plead citizenship
distinctly and affirmatively.” 15 James Wm. Moore, et al., Moore’s Federal Practice §
102.31 (3d ed. 2010). Because this action has been removed from state court to this
Court, the party seeking to invoke diversity jurisdiction is the defendant; however, the
party seeking removal has burden of establishing federal subject matter jurisdiction. In re
Business Men’s Assur. Co. of America, 992 F.2d 181, 183 (8th Cir. 1993).

1

The Notice of Removal in this case asserts that the Court has jurisdiction over the
action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 because the lawsuit is between citizens of different
States and the matter in controversy exceeds the sum of $75,000. Plaintiff in this case is
a Limited Liability Company, and defendants include an individual and a Limited
Liability Company.
The Eighth Circuit has held that unincorporated entities such as limited liability
companies are citizens of every state of which any member is a citizen. See GMAC
Commercial Credit, LLC v. Dillard Dep’t Stores, Inc., 357 F.3d 827, 829 (8th Cir. 2004).
Thus, for the LLC parties, the Court must examine the citizenship of each member of
those entities to determine whether diversity jurisdiction exists. Because it is the
defendants’ burden in this case to establish subject matter jurisdiction, In re Business
Men’s Assur. Co. of America, 992 F.2d at 183, the Court will grant defendant twenty-one
(21) days to file an amended petition which alleges facts showing the existence of the
requisite diversity of citizenship of the parties. If defendants fail to timely and fully
comply with this Order, the Court will dismiss this matter without prejudice for lack of
subject matter jurisdiction.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, by June 27, 2017, defendants shall file an
amended notice of removal in accordance with this memorandum, setting forth the
members of each limited liability company party and the citizenship of each of those
members.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if defendants do not timely and fully comply
with this order, this matter will be remanded for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all other proceedings in this case are
STAYED pending further order of this Court.
Dated this

6th

day of June, 2017.
_____________________________________
STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3