Norgal Seattle Partnership, et al v. National Surety Corporation, et al

Filing 9

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE, by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. National Surety Corporation Show Cause ddl 6/24/2011. (CL)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8

NORGAL SEATTLE PARTNERSHIP,

9
10
11
12
13

Plaintiff,
Case No. C11-0720RSL
v.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
NATIONAL SURETY CORPORATION,
et al.,
Defendants.

14
15

This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. On April 27, 2011,

16

defendant National Surety Corporation removed this matter from state court alleging that

17

this Court has jurisdiction based on the diversity of citizenship of the parties. See 28

18

U.S.C. § 1332(a) (establishing that the federal court’s basic diversity jurisdiction extends

19

to “all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds . . . $75,000 . . . and is

20

between . . . citizens of different States.”). “For a case to qualify for federal jurisdiction

21

under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a), there must be complete diversity of citizenship between the

22

parties opposed in interest.” Kuntz v. Lamar Corp., 385 F.3d 1177, 1181 (9th Cir. 2004)

23

(internal citation omitted). In examining whether complete diversity is present, the

24

citizenship of a partnership is determined by examining the citizenship of the partners,

25
26

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - 1

1

owners, or members. See Johnson v. Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894,

2

899 (9th Cir. 2006) (holding that “like a partnership, an LLC is a citizen of every state of

3

which its owners/members are citizens.”).

4

In its Notice of Removal, defendant fails to allege the citizenship of each

5

partner, owner, or member of the plaintiff entity. Nor are the missing jurisdictional facts

6

supplied in plaintiff’s complaint. Therefore, defendant has failed to meet its burden to

7

establish the basis of the Court’s jurisdiction. See Indus. Tectonics, Inc. v. Aero Alloy,

8

912 F.2d 1090, 1092 (9th Cir. 1990) (“The party asserting jurisdiction has the burden of

9

proving all jurisdictional facts”); Fed R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) (“If the Court determines at any

10
11

time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action”).
Defendant is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why the Court

12

should not dismiss this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Fed. R. Civ. P.

13

12(h)(3). Defendant shall, on or before June 24, 2011, provide the Court with the

14

citizenship of all of the partners, owners, or members of Norgal Seattle Partnership at the

15

time the complaint was filed. The Clerk of the Court is directed to place this order to

16

show cause on the Court’s calendar for June 24, 2011.

17
Dated this 9th day of June, 2011.
18
19

A

20

Robert S. Lasnik
United States District Judge

21
22
23
24
25
26

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - 2