Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-06647/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-06647-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NEXREP, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

ALIPHCOM,

Defendant.

Case No. 16-cv-06647-JSC 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE:

JURISDICTION

Plaintiff NexRep, LLC filed this action alleging breach of contract and unjust enrichment 

against Defendant Aliphcom, d.b.a. Jawbone on November 16, 2016. (Dkt. No. 1.) Now pending 

before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment. (Dkt. No. 16.)

When a party seeks entry of default judgment, courts have a duty to examine their own 

jurisdiction—both subject matter and personal. In re Tuli, 172 F.3d 707, 712 (9th Cir. 1999). 

Indeed, at all times the Court has an independent responsibility to ensure it has federal subject 

matter jurisdiction. Valdez v. Allstate Ins. Co., 372 F.3d 1115, 1116 (9th Cir. 2004); see 

also Gonzalez v. Thaler, 132 S. Ct. 641, 648 (2012) (“When a requirement goes to subject-matter 

jurisdiction, courts are obligated to consider sua sponte issues that the parties have disclaimed or 

have not presented . . . . Subject-matter jurisdiction can never be waived or forfeited”) (internal 

citation omitted). Plaintiff asserts the Court has jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s claims based on 

federal diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Diversity jurisdiction requires that 

“the parties be in complete diversity and the amount in controversy exceed $75,000.” Matheson v. 

Progressive Specialty Ins. Co., 319 F.3d 1089, 1090 (9th Cir. 2003). Complete diversity means 

that “each of the plaintiffs must be a citizen of a different state than each of the defendants.” 

Allstate Ins. Co. v. Hughes, 358 F.3d 1089, 1095 (9th Cir. 2004). Further, the party asserting 

Case 4:16-cv-06647-PJH Document 19 Filed 02/24/17 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

diversity jurisdiction bears the burden of proof. Resnik v. La Paz Guest Ranch, 289 F.2d 814, 819 

(9th Cir. 1961).

Here, NexRep is a limited liability company (“LLC”) organized and existing under the 

laws of the State of Delaware, and Jawbone is a California corporation with its principal place of 

business in California. (Dkt. No. 16-2 ¶¶ 2-3.) Generally, an LLC is a “citizen of every state in 

which its members are citizens.” Johnson v. Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 

(9th Cir. 2006). However, Plaintiff has failed to include any allegations as to the citizenship of its 

members.

Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED to SHOW CAUSE as to the citizenship of its 

members. Plaintiff shall file a written response to the Court’s Order by March 3, 2017.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 24, 2017

______________________________________

JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:16-cv-06647-PJH Document 19 Filed 02/24/17 Page 2 of 2