Unpublished Disposition, 843 F.2d 501 (9th Cir. 1988)

MEMORANDUM^* 

The district court dismissed this action for lack of jurisdiction. It held that no federal question jurisdiction existed on the RICO claim, and that no diversity jurisdiction existed to hear the state claims because of the lack of complete diversity of citizenship between the plaintiff and the defendants.

The parties agree that the RICO claim was apparently dismissed on the basis of the original complaint, rather than the First Amended Complaint. It appears that the district court did not realize that the First Amended Complaint had been timely filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a) and was thus properly before the court at the time the order for dismissal was entered. The First Amended Complaint revised the RICO claim as set forth in the sixth claim for relief in the original complaint, and added seventh and eighth claims for relief under RICO. The district court orders reflect that the three distinct RICO claims were not considered before dismissal.

Both appellant and appellees concede that complete diversity of citizenship existed between the plaintiff and all of the defendants. Defendants Catalyst Energy Development Corporation and Catalyst Energy Holdings Corporation are Delaware corporations with their principal places of business in New York. Defendant Catalyst Golden Bear Cogeneration Partnership is a California limited partnership in which Catalyst Energy Holdings Corporation is its only general partner and IULP Corporation is its only limited partner. The IULP Corporation is also a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in New York. In determining whether diversity of citizenship exists, we look to the citizenship of the persons composing the partnership, not to where the partnership was formed. Great Southern Fire Proof Hotel Co. v. Jones, 177 U.S. 449, 456 (1900).

Because each of the individual defendants, and each of the individual partners in the partnership, is incorporated in Delaware with its principal place of business in New York, the defendants have complete diversity from Jacobs Services Company, a California corporation with its principal place of business in California.

We reverse and remand the case to the district court to adjudicate the state claims based on diversity jurisdiction, and to consider the RICO claims as alleged in the First Amended Complaint.

REVERSED and REMANDED.