Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-01298/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-01298-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 140
Nature of Suit: Negotiable Instruments
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract

---

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

Brown Bark III, L.P., 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Jonathan Vento, Lori Vento, Grace Hotels

LLC, Donald Zeleznak, and Shirley

Zeleznak. 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 09-1298-PHX-JAT

ORDER

On July 21, 2009, this Court issued the following Order to Show cause regarding

federal subject matter jurisdiction:

“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 amended complaint fails to

sufficiently plead jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332; Johnson v. Columbia

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

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that by August 10, 2009, Plaintiff (who is the party

asserting jurisdiction and therefore the party with the burden of pleading

jurisdiction, see Industrial Tectonics v. Aero Alloy, 912 F.2d 1090, 1092 (9th

Cir. 1990)) shall file a second amended complaint properly alleging federal

subject matter jurisdiction, or this case will be dismissed without prejudice for

lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff 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 advise Plaintiff how

to plead jurisdiction.1

 Therefore, if the amended complaint fails to plead

federal subject matter jurisdiction, this case will be dismissed without the

Court sua sponte granting Plaintiff any further opportunities to amend.

Case 2:09-cv-01298-JAT Document 12 Filed 08/13/09 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 -

1

 The Court should not give a party advice because advice, “would

undermine district judges’ role as impartial decision makers.” See

Pliler v. Ford, 542 U.S. 225, 231 (2004).

Doc. #10.

On August 7, 2009, Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint which still fails to

plead federal subject matter jurisdiction. Specifically, the second amended complaint states

that Plaintiff’s general partner is a limited liability company. However, it fails to plead the

citizenship of each member of the limited liability company. See Johnson v. Columbia

Properties Anchorage, L.P., 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006). Additionally, the second

amended complaint states that Grace Hotels is a limited liability company, but fails to plead

the citizenship of each member of that limited liability company. See id. Because Plaintiff

has failed to plead federal subject matter jurisdiction,

IT IS ORDERED that this case is dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of federal

subject matter jurisdiction.

DATED this 13th day of August, 2009.

Case 2:09-cv-01298-JAT Document 12 Filed 08/13/09 Page 2 of 2