Opinion
21-cv-08440-JCS
12-08-2021
DANIEL SHINBACHEW, Plaintiff, v. GLOBAL PARKING SYSTEMS, LLC, et al., Defendants.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE REMANDED TO STATE COURT
JOSEPH C. SPERO CHIEF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Defendants Global Parking Systems, LLC and SP Plus Corporation removed this case from the Superior Court for the County of San Mateo, asserting diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). According to Defendants, Plaintiff Daniel Shinbachew is a citizen of California, while Global Parking Systems is a citizen of Louisiana (where it is incorporated and headquartered) and SP Plus is a citizen of Delaware (where it is incorporated) and Illinois (where it is headquartered). Defendants therefore assert that there is complete diversity of citizenship-i.e., no defendant is a citizen of the same state as the plaintiff-as required for jurisdiction under § 1332.
Although Defendants assert that Global Parking Systems is “a corporation formed under the laws of the State of Louisiana, ” that entity's name suggests that it is a limited liability company (“LLC”) rather than a corporation. Under Ninth Circuit precedent, “an LLC is a citizen of every state which its owners/members are citizens;” its citizenship is not based on the state of its incorporation and the state of its headquarters as for a corporation. Johnson v. Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006). Since the notice of removal does not address the citizenship of Global Parking System's members, it is not clear that jurisdiction is proper under § 1332.
Defendants are therefore ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why this case should not be remanded to state court by filing no later than December 22, 2021 either: (1) a declaration addressing the citizenship of each of Global Parking Systems' members; or (2) in the seemingly unlikely event that, despite its name, Global Parking Systems is in fact a corporation rather than an LLC, a declaration to that effect.
IT IS SO ORDERED.