From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Starlinx Glob. Serv. v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE
Aug 21, 2020
Case No. C20-1243RSL (W.D. Wash. Aug. 21, 2020)

Opinion

Case No. C20-1243RSL

08-21-2020

STARLINX GLOBAL SERVICE LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. AMERICAN FAMILY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, S.I., Defendant.


ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. On August 18, 2020, defendant removed this action to federal court alleging that the Court has jurisdiction based on the diversity of citizenship of the parties. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) (establishing that the federal court's basic diversity jurisdiction extends to "all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds . . . $75,000 . . . and is between . . . citizens of different States."). "For a case to qualify for federal jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a), there must be complete diversity of citizenship between the parties opposed in interest." Kuntz v. Lamar Corp., 385 F.3d 1177, 1181 (9th Cir. 2004) (internal citation omitted). In examining whether complete diversity is present, the citizenship of a limited liability company is determined by examining the citizenship of the owners/members. See Johnson v. Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006) (holding that "like a partnership, an LLC is a citizen of every state of which its owners/members are citizens").

Defendant has not alleged the citizenship of each owner/member of Starlinx Global Service LLC, noting only that the LLC's "principal owner" is a resident of Washington. Dkt. # 1 at 2. The subsequent conclusory allegation that complete diversity exists is insufficient to meet defendant's burden of establishing the basis of the Court's jurisdiction. See Indus. Tectonics, Inc. v. Aero Alloy, 912 F.2d 1090, 1092 (9th Cir. 1990) ("The party asserting jurisdiction has the burden of proving all jurisdictional facts"); Fed R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) ("If the Court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action"). As a result, defendant is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why the Court should not dismiss this action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) by providing the Court with the citizenship of all of the owners/members of Starlinx Global Service LLC, at the time the complaint was filed, by September 28, 2020. The Clerk of the Court is directed to place this order to show cause on the Court's calendar for that date.

Dated this 21st day of August, 2020.

/s/_________

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Starlinx Glob. Serv. v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE
Aug 21, 2020
Case No. C20-1243RSL (W.D. Wash. Aug. 21, 2020)
Case details for

Starlinx Glob. Serv. v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:STARLINX GLOBAL SERVICE LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. AMERICAN FAMILY MUTUAL…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

Date published: Aug 21, 2020

Citations

Case No. C20-1243RSL (W.D. Wash. Aug. 21, 2020)