Capital2Market Consulting, LLC v. Camston Wrather, LLC

Filing 19

ORDER Accordingly, the Court directs the parties to advise whether they consent for the Court to deem the pre-motion letters to constitute a fully briefed motion for remand and rule on the basis of the limited briefs or whether the parties reque st supplemental or full briefing. If the parties request supplemental or full briefing, they shall submit a proposed briefing schedule within one (1) week of the date of this Order. The Court further orders defendant Camston Wrather, LLC to submit answers, along with supporting documentation where available, to the following questions within two (2) weeks of the date of this Order. (And as further set forth herein.) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Victor Marrero on 11/18/2022) (jca)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
CAPITAL2MARKET CONSULTING, LLC,
Plaintiff,
- against -

11/18/2022

22 Civ. 7787 (VM)
ORDER

CAMSTON WRATHER, LLC,
Defendant.
VICTOR MARRERO, United States District Judge.
The Court has reviewed the pre-motion letters exchanged
by

the

parties

regarding

whether

diversity

jurisdiction

exists in this case and is not persuaded that a pre-motion
conference is necessary at this time. (See Dkt. Nos. 9, 14,
15, 17.)
Accordingly, the Court directs the parties to advise
whether they consent for the Court to deem the pre-motion
letters to constitute a fully briefed motion for remand and
rule on the basis of the limited briefs or whether the parties
request supplemental or full briefing. If the parties request
supplemental or full briefing, they shall submit a proposed
briefing schedule within one (1) week of the date of this
Order.
The Court further orders defendant Camston Wrather, LLC
to submit answers, along with supporting documentation where
available, to the following questions within two (2) weeks of

the date of this Order:
(1)

Defendant’s

October

20,

2022

Letter

asserts

that

“[w]hile Plaintiff is correct in identifying that
Defendant
limited

Camston
liability

contracted

with

registered

as

Delaware,

the

Wrather,

LLC

company

whom

and
a

filed

foreign

membership

(the

Plaintiff

action

entity
of

California
both

against)

is

established

in

both

entities

is

different. Membership of the California entity is
limited to those who actively manage the company –
the two principals identified in Defendant’s removal
papers in ¶2 (Dkt. ## 5-6 and 5-7).” (See Dkt. No.
17, Oct. 20, 2022 Letter, at 3.)

a. Explain what is meant by “both entities,” including
by identifying the entities and detailing their
relationship to one another. (See Dkt. No. 17, Oct.
20, 2022 Letter, at 3.)

b. Identify

the

complete

memberships

of

“both

entities.” (See id.) Such identification is not to
be limited to actively managing members. (See id.)
If the membership of such entities includes limited
liability companies, identify the memberships of

those companies.

c. Identify

the

complete

memberships

of

the

“California entity” and the Delaware entity. (See
id.) Such identification is not to be limited to
actively

managing

membership

of

members.

such

(See

entities

id.)

includes

If

the

limited

liability companies, identify the membership of
those companies.

d. Explain how the registration of Camston Wrather,
LLC with the California Secretary of State as a
foreign entity established in Delaware creates a
California

entity

that

is

separate

from

the

Delaware entity.
(2)

Explain, in detail, “the interest Nancy Hament has in
the California Camston Wrather LLC entity.” (See Dkt.
No. 14, Oct. 7, 2022 Letter, at 2-3.)

(3)

Explain the basis for the statement “[i]n or around
July 2014, Defendant Camston Wrather, LLC was formed
as

a

limited

liability

company

in

the

State

of

California.” (See Dkt. No. 5, Sept. 15, 2022, Notice

of Removal, at ¶ 15.)

SO ORDERED.
Dated:

18 November, 2022
New York, New York