Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-00748/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-00748-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Product Liability

---

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

NICOLO J. SCARCELLA,

Plaintiff(s),

CASE NO. 15cv748-LAB (NLS)

ORDER REQUIRING FILING OF

vs. SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

ICONIX BRAND GROUP, INC.,

Defendant(s).

On April 7, the Court ordered Plaintiff Nicolo Scarcella to show cause why this action

should not be dismissed for failure to invoke the Court’s jurisdiction. When Scarcella filed his

response, the Court pointed out that the proposed amended complaint did not adequately

allege discharged its order to show cause, inferring that he could plead facts to establish

jurisdiction if given the chance. The Court ordered Scarcella to file an amended complaint

alleging the citizenship of Defendant Fitness EM, LLC. That order specifically pointed out that

Scarcella needed to plead the citizenship of Fitness EM’s two owner/members, not merely

the fact that they were Massachusetts homeowners and residents. The order cited authority

for the principle that while residency and/or home ownership were relevant to citizenship,

they were not the same as citizenship, and cautioned Scarcella not to rely solely on

allegations of residency and/or citizenship. (See Docket no. 4.)

/ / /

- 1 - 15cv748

Case 3:15-cv-00748-LAB-NLS Document 6 Filed 04/22/15 Page 1 of 3
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

Scarcella has now filed an amended complaint, but has not obeyed the Court’s order. 

Its factual allegations regarding the citizenship of Fitness EM’s citizenship are identical to

those the Court found inadequate and told Scarcella not to rely on. Its sole allegation

regarding the citizenship of Fitness EM’s owner/members is:

According to public records, Michael J. Savage and Donna L. Savage are

homeowners and residents of Charlton, Worcester County, Massachusetts,

thereby citizens of Massachusetts.

(Am. Compl., ¶ 8.) 

For purposes of diversity jurisdiction, citizenship is determined by domicile, not

residence. Kanter v. Warner-Lambert Co., 265 F.3d 853, 857 (9th Cir. 2001). People may

reside in a state and even own a home there without establishing domicile. See Lew v. Moss,

797 F.2d 747, 749–50 (9th Cir. 1986) (discussing definition of domicile for purposes of

diversity jurisdiction). An allegation of residence and home ownership, coupled with

Scarcella’s own legal conclusion about the legal effect of those two facts, is inadequate. See

Lacano Investments, LLC v. Balash, 765 F.3d 1068, 1071 (9th Cir. 2014) (in deciding whether

to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, court does not accept the complaint’s legal

conclusions as true, even if they are cast as factual allegations). That is particularly true here,

where Scarcella’s legal conclusions contradict binding authority. 

While the Court did not specifically mention it, the amended complaint also fails to

allege Scarcella’s own citizenship, saying only that he is a California resident and concluding

that this means he is a California citizen. (Am. Compl., ¶ 6.) Presumably, he knows what

state he is domiciled in and a citizen of, and can allege that.

Because Scarcella may inadvertently have filed the wrong document, the Court will

give him an opportunity to correct his error. No later than April 27, 2015, he is ORDERED

to file a second amended complaint properly alleging the citizenship of Fitness EM, and

alleging his own citizenship. He is particularly cautioned that alleging residency and home

ownership will not suffice, and that he must make factual allegations, not legal conclusions. 

/ / /

/ / /

- 2 - 15cv748

Case 3:15-cv-00748-LAB-NLS Document 6 Filed 04/22/15 Page 2 of 3
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

If he does not do this within the time permitted, this action will be dismissed without prejudice

but without leave to amend.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 22, 2015 ___________________________________

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS

United States District Judge 

- 3 - 15cv748

Case 3:15-cv-00748-LAB-NLS Document 6 Filed 04/22/15 Page 3 of 3