SI03, Inc. v. Bodybuilding.com, L.L.C.
Filing
3
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER... IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, by October 1, 2010, plaintiff shall file an amended complaint which shall allege facts establishing the citizenship of each of the defendant LLC's members. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if plaintif f does not timely and fully comply with this order, this matter will be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all other proceedings in this case are STAYED pending further order of this Court. Amended/Supplemental Pleadings due by 10/1/2010. Signed by Honorable Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 9/10/2010. (JMC)
<![CDATA[
SI03, Inc. v. Bodybuilding.com, L.L.C.
Doc. 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION
SI03, INC., Plaintiff, vs. BODYBUILDING.COM, LLC, Defendant.
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case No. 1:10-CV-136 SNLJ
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on review of the file following assignment to the undersigned. The Eight Circuit has admonished district courts to "be attentive to a satisfaction of jurisdictional requirements in all cases." Sanders v. Clemco Indus., 823 F.2d 214, 216 (8th Cir. 1987). "In every federal case the court must be satisfied that it has jurisdiction before it turns to the merits of other legal arguments." Carlson v. Arrowhead Concrete Works, Inc., 445 F.3d 1046, 1050 (8th Cir. 2006). "A plaintiff who seeks to invoke diversity jurisdiction of the federal courts must plead citizenship distinctly and affirmatively." 15 James Wm. Moore, et al., Moore's Federal Practice § 102.31 (3d ed. 2010). The Complaint in this case asserts that the Court has jurisdiction over the action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 because the lawsuit is between citizens of different States and the matter in controversy exceeds the sum of $75,000. The Complaint alleges that plaintiff SI03, Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Delaware with its principal place of business in Cape Girardeau County, Missouri. It further alleges that defendant Bodybuilding.com, LLC is an Idaho limited liability company with its principal place of business
Dockets.Justia.com
in Idaho. These allegations are insufficient for the Court to determine whether it has diversity jurisdiction over this matter. The defendant limited liability company's citizenship here has been addressed like that of a corporation, which is a citizen of its state of organization and its principal place of business. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332(a), (c)(1); Sanders, 823 F.2d at 215 n.1. However, the Eighth Circuit has held that limited liability companies are citizens of every state of which any member is a citizen. See GMAC Commercial Credit, LLC v. Dillard Dep't Stores, Inc., 357 F.3d 827, 829 (8th Cir. 2004). Thus, for defendant Bodybuilding.com, LLC, the Court must examine the citizenship of each member of the limited liability company to determine whether diversity jurisdiction exists. The Complaint contains no allegations concerning the members of Bodybuilding.com, LLC or their citizenship. The Court will grant plaintiff twenty-one (21) days to file an amended complaint which alleges facts showing the existence of the requisite diversity of citizenship of the parties. If plaintiff fails to timely and fully comply with this Order, the Court will dismiss this matter without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, by October 1, 2010, plaintiff shall file an amended complaint which shall allege facts establishing the citizenship of each of the defendant LLC's members. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if plaintiff does not timely and fully comply with this order, this matter will be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all other proceedings in this case are STAYED pending further order of this Court.
2
Dated this
10th
day of September, 2010.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3
]]>
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?
