Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-00712/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-00712-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1332in Diversity-Insurance Contract

---

– 1 – 17cv712

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

EVANSTON INSURANCE 

COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

Case No. 17-cv-00712-BAS-RBB

ORDER DISMISSING 

COMPLAINT WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE 

v.

BACHMAN FLATS, LLC, a 

California limited liability company,

and BACHMAN FLATS 

HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, a 

California non-profit mutual benefit

corporation,

Defendants.

On April 7, 2017, Plaintiff Evanston Insurance Company brought this claim for 

declaratory relief against Defendants Bachman Flats, LLC and Bachman Flats 

Homeowners Association (“BFHOA”). (ECF No. 1, “Compl.”) According to the 

Complaint, Defendant Bachman Flats, LLC is a California LLC, while Defendant 

BFHOA is a California nonprofit corporation. Id. ¶¶ 2–3. Evanston invokes diversity 

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.

“In civil cases, subject matter jurisdiction is generally conferred upon federal 

district courts either through diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1332, or federal 

question jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1331.” Peralta v. Hispanic Bus. Inc., 419 F.3d 1064, 

Case 3:17-cv-00712-BAS-RBB Document 4 Filed 04/10/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
– 2 – 17cv712

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

1068 (9th Cir. 2005). To invoke a district court’s diversity jurisdiction, there must be 

complete diversity of citizenship between the parties and the amount in controversy 

must exceed $75,000. See Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 267 (1806); 28 

U.S.C § 1332(a). Complete diversity exists when “the citizenship of each plaintiff is 

diverse from the citizenship of each defendant.” Caterpillar Inc. v. Lewis, 519 U.S. 

61, 68 (1996). The party seeking to invoke diversity jurisdiction has the burden of 

both pleading and proving such jurisdiction. NewGen, LLC v. Safe Cig, LLC, 840 F.3d 

606, 613–14 (9th Cir. 2016) (citation omitted).

Here, Plaintiff alleges that Bachman Flats, LLC “is a limited liability company 

organized and existing under the laws of the State of California with its principal place 

of business in San Diego County, California.” (Compl. ¶ 2.) This allegation is 

insufficient to allege diversity jurisdiction. For purposes of diversity jurisdiction, “an 

LLC is a citizen of every state of which its owners/members are citizens.” Johnson v. 

Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006). Here, Plaintiff 

alleges the state in which Defendant Bachman Flats, LLC was formed and does 

business, but makes no allegations regarding the citizenship of the LLC’s constituent 

members. Therefore, Plaintiff has not sufficiently pled complete diversity, and the 

Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this case.

For these reasons, the Court DISMISSES Plaintiff’s Complaint with leave to

amend. Plaintiff may file an Amended Complaint properly alleging the citizenship of 

Bachman Flats, LLC no later than April 17, 2017.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 10, 2017

Case 3:17-cv-00712-BAS-RBB Document 4 Filed 04/10/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2