"'[T]he party asserting subject-matter jurisdiction . . . has the burden of proving its existence by a preponderance of the evidence.'" Chen v. Sun, No. 13 Civ. 00280 (ALC) (KNF), 2016 WL 270869, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 21, 2016) (quoting Garanti Finansal Kiralama A.S. v. Aqua Marine & Trading Inc., 697 F.3d 59, 65 (2d Cir. 2012)).

"'[T]he party asserting subject-matter jurisdiction . . . has the burden of proving its existence by a preponderance of the evidence.'" Chen v. Sun, No. 13 Civ. 00280 (ALC) (KNF), 2016 WL 270869, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 21, 2016) (quoting Garanti Finansal Kiralama A.S. v. Aqua Marine & Trading Inc., 697 F.3d 59, 65 (2d Cir. 2012)). Moreover, to survive a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), "a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'" Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).

"A party's domicile is 'the place where a person has his true fixed home and principal establishment, and to which, whenever he is absent, he has the intention of returning.' " Chen v. Sun, 2016 WL 270869, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 21, 2016) (quoting Palazzo ex rel. Delmage v. Corio, 232 F.3d 38, 42 (2d Cir. 2000)). "Where there is evidence indicating that a party has more than one residence, or the residence is unclear, the Court should look to the party's intent."

"'[T]he party asserting subject-matter jurisdiction . . . has the burden of proving its existence by a preponderance of the evidence.'" Chen v. Sun, No. 13 Civ. 00280 (ALC) (KNF), 2016 WL 270869, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 21, 2016) (quoting Garanti Finansal Kiralama A.S. v. Aqua Marine & Trading Inc., 697 F.3d 59, 65 (2d Cir. 2012)). "In resolving a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(1), a district court . . . may refer to evidence outside the pleadings."

For purposes of diversity, however, the Court must determine the parties' domiciles as of the filing of the Proposed Amended Complaint. See Chen v. Sun, 13 Civ. 280 (ALC) (KNF), 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7253, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 21, 2016) ("While the existence of jurisdiction ordinarily depends on the facts as they existed when the complaint was filed, 'when a plaintiff files a complaint in federal court and then voluntarily amends the complaint, courts look to the amended complaint to determine jurisdiction.'") (quoting Rockwell Int'l Corp. v. United States, 549 U.S. 457, 473-74 (2007)).