UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 14, 2012
GREGORY D. LERMAN
MY PILLOW, INC., ET AL.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Present: The Honorable Andrew J. Guilford
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Lisa Bredahl Not Present Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No.
Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants:
Proceedings: [IN CHAMBERS] ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
The complaint seeks to allege diversity jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332. However, the exercise of diversity jurisdiction would be improper for the reason(s) checked below:
[X] The complaint sets forth only the residence, rather than the citizenship, of the parties, but diversity or alienage is based upon a party's citizenship. See 28 U.S.C. 1332(a).
[ ] A corporation is joined as a party. The complaint fails to set forth either the corporation's state of incorporation or its principal place of business (both must be set forth). See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c).
[ ] A partnership or unincorporated association is joined as a party. For diversity or alienage jurisdiction to be proper, none of the partners or members, including limited partners, can be a citizen of the same state as any opposing party. The citizenship of all the entity's partners must therefore be alleged. Carden v. Arkoma Assocs., 494 U.S. 185, 192-96, 110 S. Ct. 1015, 1019-21, 108 L. Ed. 2d 157 (1990); Rockwell Int'l Credit Corp. v. United States Aircraft Ins. Group, 823 F.2d 302, 304 (9th Cir. 1987).
[ ] All plaintiffs are not diverse from all defendants. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332; see also
Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 267 (1806).
[ ] The complaint fails to allege the citizenship of one or more parties. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
[ ] The complaint fails to allege an amount in controversy in excess of $75,000. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
[ ] Defendants did not timely remove the Complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b).
Accordingly, the Court orders Plaintiff to show cause in writing within 14 days of this Order why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Defendants may submit a response within 14 days of Plaintiff's response. An amended complaint correcting the deficiencies will be deemed a sufficient response to this order to show cause.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.