Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-02503/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-02503-0/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

1

 EFTEC is advised that the capitalization of the parties' names in the caption of the

 Notice of Removal violates LRCiv 7.1(a)(3). 

- 1 -

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Supplier's City SA De CV, )

)

Plaintiff, ) No. CV-06-2503-PHX-PGR

)

vs. )

) ORDER

EFTEC North America, LLC, )

et al., )

)

Defendants. ) )

Defendant EFTEC North America, LLC ("EFTEC") removed this action on

October 19, 2006 solely on the basis of diversity of citizenship jurisdiction. 

Having reviewed EFTEC's Notice of Removal to determine if subject matter

jurisdiction exists in this Court, the Court finds that the Notice of Removal is

facially deficient because it fails to properly allege the existence of diversity of

citizenship jurisdiction.1

As the Supreme Court has long since, and repeatedly, made clear, [t]he 

established rule is that a plaintiff [or removing defendant], suing in

federal court, must show in his pleading, affirmatively and distinctly,

Case 2:06-cv-02503-PGR Document 4 Filed 10/23/06 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 - 2 -

the existence of whatever is essential to federal jurisdiction, and, if

he does not do so, the court, on having the defect called to its

attention or on discovering the same, must dismiss [or remand] the

case, unless the defect be corrected by amendment.

Smith v. McCullough, 270 U.S. 456, 459, 46 S.Ct. 338, 339 (1926); accord, Rilling

v. Burlington Northern Railroad Co., 909 F.2d 399, 400 (9th Cir. 1990). EFTEC

has not met its jurisdictional pleading burden because the Notice of Removal fails

to affirmatively set forth the facts necessary for the Court to determine its

citizenship.

The Notice of Removal fails to properly allege the citizenship of EFTEC

inasmuch as it merely states that EFTEC "is a Michigan limited liability company

with its principal place of business in Taylor, Michigan." This allegation is

insufficient as a matter of law because a limited liability company is not treated as a

corporation for purposes of determining whether diversity exists for purposes of § 1332. 

Johnson v. Columbia Properties Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006)

("Notwithstanding LLCs' corporate traits, ... every circuit that has addressed the

question treats them like partnerships for the purposes of diversity jurisdiction. ... We

therefore join our sister circuits and hold that, like a partnership, an LLC is a citizen of

every state of which its owners/members are citizens.") What is thus required in the

Notice of Removal is an affirmative identification of each member of EFTEC and an

affirmative statement as to each member's citizenship.

In order to cure this pleading deficiency, the Court will require EFTEC to file an

amended notice of removal that properly alleges the factual bases for diversity

jurisdiction. EFTEC is advised that its failure to timely comply with this order shall result

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:06-cv-02503-PGR Document 4 Filed 10/23/06 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 - 3 -

in the remand of this action without further notice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. 

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that defendant EFTEC North America, LLC shall file an

amended notice of removal properly stating a jurisdictional basis for this action no later

than November 6, 2006.

DATED this 23rd day of October, 2006.

Case 2:06-cv-02503-PGR Document 4 Filed 10/23/06 Page 3 of 3