2200 Classen LLC v. York Operating Company
Filing
8
ORDER that Defendant shall file an amended removal to allege the existence of diversity jurisdiction no later than 7/28/2011 re 1 Notice of Removal,, filed by York Operating Company. Signed by Honorable Timothy D. DeGiusti on 7/18/2011. (mb, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
2200 CLASSEN, LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
YORK OPERATING COMPANY a/k/a
YORK INTERNATIONAL CORP.,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. CIV-11-774-D
ORDER
Upon review of the Notice of Removal, the Court finds insufficient factual allegations to
support the assertion of federal subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.1 Plaintiff 2200
Classen, LLC is alleged to be a limited liability company.
Federal appellate courts have
unanimously held that a limited liability company should not be treated like a corporation under
28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1), but like a limited partnership or other unincorporated association under
Camden v. Arkoma Assocs., 494 U.S. 185, 195-96 (1990). See Zambelli Fireworks Mfg. Co. v.
Wood, 592 F.3d 412, 420 (3d Cir. 2010); Harvey v. Grey Wolf Drilling Co., 542 F.3d 1077, 1080
(5th Cir. 2008); Delay v. Rosenthal Collins Group, LLC, 585 F.3d 1003, 1005 (6th Cir. 2009);
Johnson v. Columbia Properties Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006); see also
Pramco, LLC ex rel. CFSC Consortium, LLC v. San Juan Bay Marina, Inc., 435 F.3d 51, 54 (1st Cir.
2006); General Tech. Applications, Inc. v. Exro Ltda, 388 F.3d 114, 120 (4th Cir. 2004); GMAC
Commercial Credit LLC v. Dillard Dep't Stores, Inc., 357 F.3d 827, 828-29 (8th Cir. 2004); Rolling
1
The Court has “an independent obligation to determine whether subject-matter jurisdiction exists”
and may raise the issue sua sponte at any time. 1mage Software, Inc. v. Reynolds & Reynolds Co., 459 F.3d
1044, 1048 (10th Cir. 2006).
Greens MHP, L.P. v. Comcast SCH Holdings LLC, 374 F.3d 1020, 1022 (11th Cir. 2004);
Handelsman v. Bedford Village Assocs. Ltd. P'ship, 213 F.3d 48, 51 (2d Cir. 2000); Cosgrove v.
Bartolotta, 150 F.3d 729, 731 (7th Cir. 1998). The Notice of Removal contains no information
concerning the citizenship of the members or owners of 2200 Classen, LLC and, therefore, fails to
allege Plaintiff’s citizenship.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant shall file an amended notice of removal to
allege the existence of diversity jurisdiction not later than July 28, 2011.2
IT IS SO ORDERED this 18th
day of July, 2011.
2
Defendants need not re-file the exhibits attached to the Notice of Removal but may incorporate
them by reference pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(c).
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?