The opinion of the court was delivered by: Morrison C. England, Jr. United States District Judge
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM DOE 10
Through this action, Plaintiffs seek damages for an alleged violation of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act in connection with the purchase of a car allegedly manufactured by Defendant. However, Plaintiffs have not pled sufficient facts to establish subject matter jurisdiction.
It is fundamental that federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. Vacek v. United States Postal Serv., 447 F.3d 1141, 1145 (9th Cir. 2006). This Court has a duty to ensure that jurisdiction is proper, and may do so sua sponte. Spencer Enterprises, Inc. v. U.S., 345 F.3d 683, 687 (9th Cir. 2003); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3). Federal courts are presumed to lack jurisdiction. A-Z Int'l v. Phillips, 323 F.3d 1141, 1145 (9th Cir. 2003). As a result, the grounds of diversity jurisdiction must be affirmatively alleged in the pleadings. Amerault v. Intelcom Support Serv., Inc., 16 F. App'x 724 (9th Cir. 2001).
Plaintiffs assert that jurisdiction is based upon diversity pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). (Compl. ¶ 4.) Section 1332(a) requires complete diversity of citizenship between the parties opposed in interest. Kuntz v. Lamar Corp., 385 F.3d 1177, 1181 (9th Cir. 2004). A corporation is a citizen of its state(s) of incorporation and its principal place of business. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1). However, a limited liability corporation ("LLC") is a citizen of every state in which its members are citizens. Johnson v. Columbia Properties Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006).
General Motors, LLC is the named Defendant in this case. (Compl. 1.) In their Complaint, Plaintiffs allege only Defendant's state of incorporation and principal place of business. (Id.) Because Defendant is an LLC, Plaintiffs must allege the citizenship of all of Defendant's members in their complaint to establish diversity jurisdiction. Dismissal is appropriate as a result of Plaintiffs' failure to properly plead grounds for jurisdiction. See Kim-C1, LLC v. Valent Biosciences Corp., No. 1:10-cv-591-AWI-DLV, 2010 WL 2292289 (E.D. Cal. 2010).
Plaintiffs' Complaint (ECF No. 1) is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk is ordered to close the case.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw ...