Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_16-cv-02248/USCOURTS-azd-2_16-cv-02248-0/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 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

David Kaufman, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Warner Bros. Entertainment Incorporated, 

et al., 

Defendants. 

No. CV-16-02248-PHX-JAT

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). Further, the Court must assess its subject matter jurisdiction at the time 

the complaint filed. See Grupo Dataflux v. Atlas Global Group, L.P., 541 U.S. 567, 570-

71 (2004). 

 Here, the original complaint (Doc. 1) fails to sufficiently plead jurisdiction. 

Specifically, it fails to allege a principal place of business for any of the six Defendant 

corporations. See Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 559 U.S. 77, 80, 92-93 (2010) (discussing the 

citizenship of a corporation). 

 Accordingly, 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

Case 2:16-cv-02248-JAT Document 29 Filed 02/16/17 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 

IT IS ORDERED that by February 23, 2017, Plaintiff shall file a supplement to 

the original complaint properly alleging diversity jurisdiction at the time the case was 

filed, or this case will be dismissed for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. 

 Dated this 16th day of February, 2017. 

Case 2:16-cv-02248-JAT Document 29 Filed 02/16/17 Page 2 of 2