2200 Classen, LLCv.York Operating Company

United States District Court, W.D. OklahomaJul 18, 2011
Case No. CIV-11-774-D (W.D. Okla. Jul. 18, 2011)

Case No. CIV-11-774-D.

July 18, 2011


ORDER


TIMOTHY DeGIUSTI, District Judge

Upon review of the Notice of Removal, the Court finds insufficient factual allegations to support the assertion of federal subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Plaintiff 2200 Classen, LLC is alleged to be a limited liability company. Federal appellate courts have unanimously held that a limited liability company should not be treated like a corporation under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1), but like a limited partnership or other unincorporated association under Camden v. Arkoma Assocs., 494 U.S. 185, 195-96 (1990). See Zambelli Fireworks Mfg. Co. v. Wood, 592 F.3d 412, 420 (3d Cir. 2010); Harvey v. Grey Wolf Drilling Co., 542 F.3d 1077, 1080 (5th Cir. 2008); Delay v. Rosenthal Collins Group, LLC, 585 F.3d 1003, 1005 (6th Cir. 2009); Johnson v. Columbia Properties Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006); see also Pramco, LLC ex rel. CFSC Consortium, LLC v. San Juan Bay Marina, Inc., 435 F.3d 51, 54 (1st Cir. 2006); General Tech. Applications, Inc. v. Exro Ltda, 388 F.3d 114, 120 (4th Cir. 2004); GMAC Commercial Credit LLC v. Dillard Dep't Stores, Inc., 357 F.3d 827, 828-29 (8th Cir. 2004); Rolling Greens MHP, L.P. v. Comcast SCH Holdings LLC, 374 F.3d 1020, 1022 (11th Cir. 2004); Handelsman v. Bedford Village Assocs. Ltd. P'ship, 213 F.3d 48, 51 (2d Cir. 2000); Cosgrove v. Bartolotta, 150 F.3d 729, 731 (7th Cir. 1998). The Notice of Removal contains no information concerning the citizenship of the members or owners of 2200 Classen, LLC and, therefore, fails to allege Plaintiff's citizenship.

The Court has "an independent obligation to determine whether subject-matter jurisdiction exists" and may raise the issue sua sponte at any time. Image Software, Inc. v. Reynolds Reynolds Co., 459 F.3d 1044, 1048 (10th Cir. 2006).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant shall file an amended notice of removal to allege the existence of diversity jurisdiction not later than July 28, 2011.

Defendants need not re-file the exhibits attached to the Notice of Removal but may incorporate them by reference pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 10(c).

IT IS SO ORDERED.