Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-00776/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-00776-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- 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 1

 28 U.S.C. § 1332.

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Equisource Capital Limited Company, an

Arizona limited liability company, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Benchmark Hospitality, Inc., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 07-776-PHX-JAT

ORDER

Despite never citing the diversity statute,1

 Defendant purported to remove this case

based on alleged diversity jurisdiction. However, Defendant failed to allege sufficient facts

for this Court to determine whether there is complete diversity among the parties.

Specifically, Plaintiff is a limited liability company.

 Unincorporated enterprises are analogized to partnerships, which take the

citizenship of every general and limited partner. Carden v. Arkoma

Associates, 494 U.S. 185 (1990). ... [L]imited liability companies are citizens

of every state of which any member is a citizen.

Belleville Catering Co. v. Champaign Market Place, L.L.C., 350 F.3d 691, 692 (7th Cir.

2003); see also Johnson v. Columbia Properties Anchorage, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir.

2006).

The only allegation made with respect to Plaintiff L.L.C. is "Plaintiff asserts

that...it...is a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of the State of

Case 2:07-cv-00776-JAT Document 9 Filed 04/30/07 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

- 2 -

Arizona, with its principle place of business in Arizona." Doc. #1 at 2. This allegation is

insufficient because Defendant (as the parties asserting jurisdiction) must allege the

citizenship of each member of the L.L.C.

Additionally, "removal 'cannot be based simply upon conclusory allegations' where

the [complaint] is silent" as to the dollar amount of damages the plaintiff seeks. Singer v.

State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 116 F.3d 373, 377 (9th Cir. 1997) (citing Allen v. R&H Oil

& Gas Co., 63 F.3d 1326, 1335 (5th Cir. 1995)). Thus, because the complaint is silent as to

the amount in controversy, the notice of removal must also correct this defective allegation.

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that by May 11, 2007, Defendant shall file an amended notice of

removal that corrects these jurisdictional deficiencies or this case will be remanded for lack

of federal subject matter jurisdiction.

DATED this 30th day of April, 2007.

Case 2:07-cv-00776-JAT Document 9 Filed 04/30/07 Page 2 of 2