Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-01041/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-01041-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 23:134 P.I.- Auto Negligence

---

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

Carlos Moreno, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Yamaha Motor Corporation; U.S.A.;

Yamaha Motor Manufacturing

Corporation of America; Yamaha Motor

Co., Ltd., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 09-1041-PHX-JAT

ORDER

“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). In this case, Plaintiff makes no jurisdictional allegation regarding federal subject

matter jurisdiction in the complaint.

Because federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, the party asserting

jurisdiction must plead sufficient facts for this Court to assess its jurisdiction. Kokkonen v.

Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994); Valdez v. Allstate, 372 F.3d 1115,

1116-17 (9th Cir. 2004).

Therefore,

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:09-cv-01041-JAT Document 8 Filed 06/15/09 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 -

IT IS ORDERED that by July 2, 2009, Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint

properly alleging federal subject matter jurisdiction, or this case will be dismissed without

prejudice for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction.

DATED this 12th day of June, 2009.

Case 2:09-cv-01041-JAT Document 8 Filed 06/15/09 Page 2 of 2