Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-01587/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-01587-1/pdf.json

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

---

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

Joseph M. Kunz, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

DJO, LLC; DJO, Inc.; I-Flow Corp., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 10-1587-PHX-JAT

ORDER

The Court has reviewed the record in this case and finds the status to be as follows.

Defendants DJO, LLC and DJO, Inc. moved to dismiss on June 23, 2010 (Doc. 17). No

response or reply to this motion was ever filed. This motion was noticed for hearing on

September 24, 2010. This motion was not ruled on before the case was transferred to

Arizona. Defendant I-Flow Corp. answered on July 26, 2010 (Doc. 39).

Additionally, the Court has reviewed the jurisdictional allegations of the Complaint

and finds that Plaintiff has failed to plead federal subject matter jurisdiction. Specifically,

Defendant DJO, LLC is a limited liability company. To plead the citizenship of a limited

liability company, Plaintiff must allege the citizenship of every member of the limited

liability company. Johnson v. Columbia Properties Anchorage, L.P., 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th

Cir. 2006).

Case 2:10-cv-01587-SRB Document 59 Filed 08/17/10 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

 “Inquiring whether the court has jurisdiction is a federal judge’s first duty in every

case.” Belleville Catering Co. v. Champaign Market Place, L.L.C., 350 F.3d 691, 693 (7th

Cir. 2003). 

- 2 -

Going forward, this Court must first assess jurisdiction.1 Then, if Plaintiff pleads

jurisdiction, the Court can consider any motions. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the motion to dismiss (Doc. 17) is denied without prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint within 20

days of the date of this Order properly pleading federal subject matter jurisdiction or this case

will be dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, if Plaintiff files an amended complaint, Defendants

shall answer or otherwise respond to the amended complaint within 20 days of the date the

amended complaint is filed.

IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that if a motion to dismiss is filed in response to the

amended complaint, Plaintiff shall respond to the motion within the time limit set in the

Local Civil Rules for the District of Arizona; failure to timely respond will be deemed

consent to the Court granting the motion. See Local Rule Civil 7.2(i).

DATED this 17th day of August, 2010.

Case 2:10-cv-01587-SRB Document 59 Filed 08/17/10 Page 2 of 2