Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_24-cv-03413/USCOURTS-azd-2_24-cv-03413-0/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

Dietmar Hanke,

Plaintiff,

v. 

Jason Trembly, et al.,

Defendants.

No. CV-24-03413-PHX-KML

ORDER 

Plaintiff Dietmar Hanke filed this suit against ten defendants alleging diversity 

jurisdiction. (Doc. 1 at 1-2.) The complaint alleges Hanke is a “resident of Phoenix, 

Arizona” and “[a]t least three of the listed defendants . . . were/are residents of Florida and 

Delaware.” (Doc. 1 at 2.) The complaint also alleges three of the individuals named as 

defendants are Arizona residents. Two of those Arizona residents own the defendant 

companies. (Doc. 1 at 3.) Hanke is required to file a supplement establishing complete 

diversity of citizenship. 

The defendant companies are limited liability companies. “[A]n LLC is a citizen of 

every state of which its owners/members are citizens.” Johnson v. Columbia Properties 

Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006). The complaint alleges defendants John 

Rowley and Marcia Rowley “are/were” the owners of the defendant LLCs. The supplement 

must state whether the Rowley are the only owners/members of the LLCs. If there are other 

members, they must be identified.

The complaint’s allegations identify the residency of defendants. “But the diversity 

Case 2:24-cv-03413-KML Document 6 Filed 12/05/24 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

jurisdiction statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1332, speaks of citizenship, not of residency.” Kanter v. 

Warner-Lambert Co., 265 F.3d 853, 857 (9th Cir. 2001). Hanke’s supplement must allege 

the citizenship, not the residency, of each defendant. That must include the named 

defendants as well as any other owners/members of the LLCs.

Finally, diversity jurisdiction “requires ‘complete diversity’ of citizenship, meaning 

that ‘the citizenship of each plaintiff is diverse from the citizenship of each defendant.’” 

Demarest v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 920 F.3d 1223, 1226 (9th Cir. 2019) (quoting 

Caterpillar v. Lewis, 519 U.S. 61, 68 (1996)). Instead of “complete diversity,” the 

complaint appears to believe it is sufficient for there to be “minimal diversity” between the 

parties. “Minimal diversity” refers to the plaintiff being a citizen of a state different from 

any defendant. See, e.g., Ehrman v. Cox Commc’ns, Inc., 932 F.3d 1223, 1226 (9th Cir. 

2019). But minimal diversity is not enough. See Broadway Grill, Inc. v. Visa Inc., 856 F.3d 

1274, 1277 (9th Cir. 2017) (“complete diversity” is required in most civil actions but 

“minimal diversity” is sufficient in certain class actions).

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED no later than December 12, 2024, plaintiff shall file a 

supplement identifying the members or owners of each LLC and the citizenship of every 

relevant individual or entity.

Dated this 5th day of December, 2024.

Case 2:24-cv-03413-KML Document 6 Filed 12/05/24 Page 2 of 2