Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-01276/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-01276-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 371
Nature of Suit: Truth in Lending
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Injunctive/Declaratory Relief

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Juan Batres, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

vs.

(1)Homecomings Financial LLC

(2)Aurora Loan Services LLC

(3)Mortgage Electronic Registrations

Systems, Inc.

(4) Does.

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 10-1276-PHX-JAT

ORDER

One July 16, 2010, the Court issued the following order:

“Inquiring whether the court has jurisdiction is a federal judge’s first duty

in every case.” Belleville Catering Co. v. Champaign Market Place, L.L.C., 350 F.3d 691, 693 (7th Cir. 2003). 

In this case, the notice of removal fails to sufficiently plead jurisdiction.

See 28 U.S.C. § 1332; Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 130 S. Ct. 1181, 1192; - - - U.S.

- - - (2010) (discussing the citizenship of a corporation); Johnson v. Columbia

Properties Anchorage, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006) (discussing the

citizenship of a limited liability company).

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that by July 30, 2010, the removing Defendant shall

file an amended notice of removal properly alleging federal subject matter

jurisdiction, or this case will be remanded for lack of federal subject matter

jurisdiction.[footnote omitted]

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant is cautioned that it will be

given one opportunity to amend to cure the jurisdiction defects. The Court

will not issue additional sua sponte show cause orders to assist Defendant in

pleading jurisdiction. [footnote omitted] Therefore, if the amended notice of

removal fails to plead federal subject matter jurisdiction, this case will be

Case 2:10-cv-01276-JAT Document 13 Filed 08/10/10 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

remanded without the Court sua sponte granting Defendant any further

opportunities to amend.

Doc. 10.

This Court has reviewed the amended notice of removal and notes that with respect

to both limited liability companies, the removing Defendant claims that no members of the

limited liability companies are residents of Arizona. Nonetheless, as Belleville Catering

suggests, this Court must “independently” determine whether there is jurisdiction. 350 F.3d

at 693. Here, the amended notice of removal fails to list all of the members of the limited

liability companies or the citizenship of those members. The jurisdictional information

provided by the removing Defendant is, thus, insufficient for the Court to independently

determine that jurisdiction exists. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that by August 13, 2010, the removing Defendant shall file a

supplement to the amended notice of removal listing every member of both limited liability

companies and the citizenship of each of those members or this case will be remanded to

state court for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction.

DATED this 10th day of August, 2010.

Case 2:10-cv-01276-JAT Document 13 Filed 08/10/10 Page 2 of 2