Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Title: Armin Wittenburg v. Russo and Steele

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


May 1, 2013

TITLE: ARMIN WITTENBURG
v.
RUSSO AND STEELE, LLC, ET AL.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Josephine Staton Tucker, United States District Judge

CIVIL MINUTES -- GENERAL

Present: Honorable JOSEPHINE STATON TUCKER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dwayne Roberts N/A

Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANT:

Not Present Not Present

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO

SHOW CAUSE RE SUBJECT-MATTER JURISDICTION

Plaintiff Armin Wittenburg filed this case in federal court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. (Compl. ¶ 13, Doc. 1.) Plaintiff asserts that "[t]here exists a diversity of citizenship between Plaintiff and Defendants in that the Russo Defendants [Russo and Steele, LLC and Russo and Steele, L.L.C.*fn1 ] either reside in or operate two (2) principal offices, one (1) located in Arizona and the other in Costa Mesa, California." (Id.) Plaintiff, thus, seemingly asserts that Russo and Steele, LLC is a citizen of both Arizona and California. A limited liability company, however, is a citizen of every state of which "its owners/members are citizens." Johnson v. Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006).

Moreover, Plaintiff asserts that he is an "individual residing in . . . California," (see Compl. ¶ 1), and is therefore a citizen of California. Diversity of citizenship, however, exists only when "there is complete diversity between all named plaintiffs and all named defendants." Lincoln Prop. Co. v. Roche, 546 U.S. 81, 84 (2005). In order to establish complete diversity between parties for the purpose of establishing federal subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, all parties must be "citizens of different States." 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1). Plaintiff has failed to show how parties are completely diverse, and has instead provided the Court with evidence to show that parties are not, in fact, diverse.

Accordingly, Plaintiff is ordered to show cause no later than May 10, 2013, why this case should not be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Specifically, Plaintiff must allege the citizenship of Defendant Russo and Steele, LLC. Failure to timely respond will result in immediate dismissal of this action.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.