Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-00200/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-00200-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:2201dj Declaratory Judgment

---

1

18-CV-0200 W (KSC)

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GUARDION HEALTH SERVICES, 

INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

STRATEGIC UNIVERSAL ADVISORS, 

LLC, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: 18-CV-0200 W (KSC)

ORDER VACATING ORDER TO 

SHOW CAUSE [DOC. 7]

Plaintiff filed this case on January 29, 2018 on the basis of diversity jurisdiction 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. (Compl. [Doc. 1] ¶¶ 20–26.) On February 20, 2018, the 

Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause as to why this action should not be dismissed for 

lack of subject matter jurisdiction based on the fact that the Complaint did not

affirmatively allege the citizenship of any Defendant. (Feb. 20, 2018 Order [Doc. 7].) 

The Complaint alleged that “[u]pon information and belief, no members of SUA are 

citizens of California[,]” and that “Stanley and Laurie Altschuler are individuals who 

reside in Jericho, New York.” (Compl. [Doc. 1] ¶¶ 21–22.) 

Case 3:18-cv-00200-W-KSC Document 10 Filed 02/28/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 3
2

18-CV-0200 W (KSC)

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

As the Court noted, “ ‘[a]bsent unusual circumstances, a party seeking to invoke 

diversity jurisdiction should be able to allege affirmatively the actual citizenship of the 

relevant parties.’ ” (Id. [Doc. 7] 1:25–27 (quoting Kanter v. Warner-Lambert Co., 265 

F.3d 853, 857 (9th Cir. 2001).) Further, “ ‘[t]he natural person’s state citizenship is . . . 

determined by her state of domicile, not her state of residence.’ ” (Id. [Doc. 7] 1:27–2:1 

(quoting Kanter, 265 F.3d at 857).)

On Monday, February 26, 2018, Plaintiff filed a response indicating that it has 

been unable to determine the identity of Defendant LLC’s members despite “an 

exhaustive search of publicly . . . available records[.]” (Pl.’s OSC Response [Doc. 8] 1–

2; Balfour Decl. [Doc. 8-1] ¶ 2.) As Defendant Strategic Universal Advisors is a New 

York LLC, information regarding its membership is not publicly available. (See Pl.’s 

OSC Response [Doc. 8] 1:18–26 (citing N.Y. Limit. Liab. Co. § 203)). When 

“information necessary to establish the diversity of the citizenship of some of the 

defendants [is] not reasonably available to [the] plaintiff,” the plaintiff should have an 

opportunity “to plead its jurisdictional allegations as to those defendants on information 

and belief and without affirmatively asserting those defendants’ citizenship.” See

Carolina Cas. Ins. Co. v. Team Equip., Inc., 741 F.3d 1082, 1086 (9th Cir. 2014). 

Furthermore, Plaintiffs’ response indicates that both individual Defendants, 

Stanley and Laurie Altschuler, “have been residents of New York since at least 1983.” 

(Pls.’ OSC Response [Doc. 8] 2:3–9; Balfour Decl. [Doc. 8-1] ¶ 6.) It further states that 

Plaintiff “has been unable to identify any non-New York residence associated with the 

Altschuler Defendants, nor is [Plaintiff] aware of any intention of the Altschuler 

Defendants to reside outside of New York.” (Pls.’ OSC Response [Doc. 8] 2:3–9.) For 

the purpose of determining diversity jurisdiction, “[a] person’s domicile is her permanent 

home, where she resides with the intention to remain or to which she intends to return.” 

Kanter, 265 F.3d at 857. 

//

//

Case 3:18-cv-00200-W-KSC Document 10 Filed 02/28/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 3
3

18-CV-0200 W (KSC)

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

In light of the foregoing, the Order to Show Cause is hereby VACATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 28, 2018

Case 3:18-cv-00200-W-KSC Document 10 Filed 02/28/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 3