Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-02502/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-02502-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 355
Nature of Suit: Motor Vehicle Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Citizenship

---

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

Rolando Guevarra Diala, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Mitsubishi Motors North America, Inc.;

Mitsubishi Motor Sales of America, Inc.;

Mitsubishi Motors America, Inc.;

Centennial Management, Inc. 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 05-2502-PHX-JAT

ORDER

IT IS ORDERED that on October 31, 2005 at 11:45 a.m., Defendant Mitsubishi

Motors North America, Inc., shall appear and show cause why this case should not be

remanded to state court for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction.

Specifically, the party asserting jurisdiction bears the burden of proving jurisdiction.

Trentacosta v. Frontier Pac. Aircraft Industries, 813 F.2d 1553, 1559 (9th Cir. 1987); see

also McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp., 298 U.S. 178, 188 (1936). Here,

Defendants allege jurisdiction based on diversity. However, Defendants fail to allege the

citizenship of Mitsubishi Motor Sales of America, Inc., Mitsubishi Motors America, Inc., or

Case 2:05-cv-02502-JAT Document 10 Filed 10/21/05 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

1

 The federal district court has subject matter jurisdiction in diversity actions pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 over “citizens of different states”. The diversity requirement is “strict

and unequivocal.” Neat-N-Tidy Co., Inc. v. Tradepower (Holdings) Ltd., 777 F. Supp. 1153,

1156 (S.D.N.Y. 1991). Further, diversity jurisdiction requires complete diversity between

all plaintiffs and all defendants. Caterpillar v. Lewis, 386 U.S. 523, 531 (1996). 

- 2 -

Centennial Management, Inc., thereby preventing the Court from determining whether there

is complete diversity among the parties.1

DATED this 21st day of October, 2005.

Case 2:05-cv-02502-JAT Document 10 Filed 10/21/05 Page 2 of 2