Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_07-cv-08050/USCOURTS-azd-3_07-cv-08050-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Other 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

1

In order for this Court to exercise jurisdiction based on diversity under 28 U.S.C. § 1332,

complete diversity of citizenship must exist. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that diversity

jurisdiction does not exist unless each Defendant is a citizen of a different state from each Plaintiff.

Owen Equipment and Erection Co. v. Kroger, 437 U.S. 365, 373 (1978). 

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Avatar Income Fund I L.L.C., ) No. CV 07-8050-PCT-PGR

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) ORDER

)

)

Eagle Storage & Development ) 

L.L.C., )

)

Defendants. )

____________________________)

 On July 13, 2007, the Plaintiff filed a Complaint (Doc. 1) alleging jurisdiction based

solely on diversity of citizenship pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 1332 (West 2006).1

 Having

reviewed the Complaint, the Court finds that the jurisdictional allegations are inadequate to

establish the existence of subject matter jurisdiction inasmuch as the Complaint fails to

properly allege the citizenship of the parties.

The jurisdictional allegation regarding Plaintiff Avatar Income Fund I LLC (“Avatar”)

is inadequate since it merely states that the Plaintiff "is a Delaware Limited Liability

Company whose principal place of business is in the State of Washington." The Complaint

Case 3:07-cv-08050-PGR Document 4 Filed 07/24/07 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 The Plaintiff is advised that its failure to timely comply with this Order shall result in the

dismissal of this action without further notice.

- 2 -

also inadequately alleges the citizenship of Defendant Eagle Storage & Development L.L.C.

(“Eagle Storage”) by merely stating that it is "an Arizona Limited Liability Company whose

principal place of business is in the State of Arizona." These jurisdictional allegations are

insufficient as a matter of law because a limited liability company is not treated as a

corporation for purposes of determining whether diversity exists under § 1332. Johnson v.

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

L.L.C.'s corporate traits, ... every circuit that has addressed the question treats them like

partnerships for the purposes of diversity jurisdiction. ... We therefore join our sister circuits

and hold that, like a partnership, an L.L.C. is a citizen of every state of which its

owners/members are citizens.") Thus, what is required in the present Complaint is an

affirmative allegation of the citizenship of each member of the Plaintiff and the Defendant

limited liability companies. Therefore, 

IT IS ORDERED that the Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. 1) is dismissed for lack of

subject matter jurisdiction, and the Plaintiff shall file an amended Complaint properly stating

a jurisdictional basis for this action no later than Monday, August 6, 2007.2

 The Plaintiff's

failure to timely comply with this order shall result in the dismissal of this action without

further notice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Plaintiff shall forthwith give notice of this

order to any Defendant already served with process.

DATED this 23rd day of July, 2007.

Case 3:07-cv-08050-PGR Document 4 Filed 07/24/07 Page 2 of 2