Opinion
19-cv-11512 (AJN)
12-19-2019
ORDER :
The limited subject matter jurisdiction of a district court is best addressed at the outset of a case. Courts have an independent obligation to determine whether subject matter jurisdiction exists. Arbaugh v. Y&H Corp., 546 U.S. 500, 501 (2006).
Plaintiff Asesoral Business Partners, LLC brings this action invoking the Court's subject matter jurisdiction by reason of diversity of citizenship. It alleges that it is a business corporation, authorized and existing under the laws of Delaware and having its principal place of business in Wilmington, Delaware, and that Defendants are two domestic business corporations existing under the law of and having their principal places of business in New York, as well as an individual who resides in New York. See Dkt. No. 1 ¶¶ 5-8.
"For purposes of diversity jurisdiction, a limited liability company has the citizenship of each of its members." Strother v. Harte, 171 F. Supp. 2d 203, 205 (S.D.N.Y. 2001). A complaint premised on diversity of citizenship must therefore allege the citizenship of natural persons and corporations that are members of a limited liability company. See Handelsman v. Bedford Vill. Assoc. Ltd. P'ship, 213 F.3d 48, 51-52 (2d Cir. 2000) (citing Cosgrove v. Bartolotta, 150 F.3d 729, 731 (7th Cir. 1998)); Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a).
Within twenty days of the date of this Order, Plaintiff shall amend its Complaint to allege the citizenship of each constituent person or entity comprising Asesoral Business Partners, LLC (including the state of incorporation and principal place of business of any corporate entity member). If, by the foregoing date, Plaintiff is unable to amend to truthfully allege complete diversity of citizenship, then the Complaint will be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction without further notice to any party. Dated: December 19, 2019
New York, New York
/s/_________
ALISON J. NATHAN
United States District Judge