RMT, Inc. v. Cable System Installation Limited Liability Company et al
Filing
13
ORDER accepting plaintiff's notice of proof of jurisdiction. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 10/31/11. (krj)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - RMT, INC.,
ORDER
Plaintiff,
11-cv-676-bbc
v.
CABLE SYSTEM INSTALLATION LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
and CABLE SYSTEM INSTALLATIONS CORP.,
Defendants.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - In this civil action for monetary and injunctive relief, plaintiff brings claims for breach
of contract against defendants Cable System Installation Limited Liability Company and
Cable System Installations Corp. Plaintiff alleges that this court has jurisdiction pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1) because the parties are completely diverse and the matter in
controversy exceeds $75,000. On October 11, 2011, I ordered plaintiff RMT, Inc. to provide
this court with proof that the parties are actually diverse and in particular, to provide
verification of the citizenship of defendant Cable System Installation Limited Liability
Company.
Plaintiff has responded with adequate proof that plaintiff is completely diverse from
defendants. Plaintiff is a Wisconsin corporation with its principal place of business in
Wisconsin. Defendant Cable System Installation Corp. is a New Jersey corporation with its
1
principal place of business in New Jersey and the five members of defendant Cable System
Installations LLC are citizens of New York and New Jersey. Therefore, the court has
jurisdiction over this case under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1).
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff RMT, Inc.’s notice of proof of jurisdiction is
ACCEPTED.
Entered this 31st day of October, 2011.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
BARBARA B. CRABB
District Judge
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?