Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_04-cv-05334/USCOURTS-cand-4_04-cv-05334-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 380
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Property Damage
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Property Damage

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BIBEKANAND SATPATHY, d/b/a AMADORE

ENTERTAINMENT,

Plaintiff,

v.

CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS, LTD.;

COVENANT AVIATION SECURITY, LLC;

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY

ADMINISTRATION; CITY AND COUNTY OF

SAN FRANCISCO; THAI AIRWAYS

INTERNATIONAL, LTD. and DOES 1 to 50,

Defendants.

 /

No. C 04-5334 CW

ORDER DECLINING

TO REMAND

The Court ordered the parties to show cause why this case

should not be remanded to State court. Defendant Covenant Aviation

Security, LLC (Covenant) filed a motion opposing remand on the

grounds that jurisdiction is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331(a)

and 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). Plaintiff Bibekanand Satpathy did not

Case 4:04-cv-05334-CW Document 63 Filed 10/14/05 Page 1 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

respond to the order. The matter was submitted on the papers. The

Court will not remand the case.

BACKGROUND

I. Procedural History

Plaintiff originally filed a civil complaint in the Superior

Court of the State of California against multiple defendants

alleging damage to baggage containing motion picture film. The

case was subsequently removed to federal court on December 16,

2004. On February 10, 2005, Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed his

claims against Defendant Transportation Security Administration

(TSA), and on March 25, 2005, Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed his

claims against Defendant City and County of San Francisco (San

Francisco).

On September 9, 2005, the Court granted a motion for summary

judgment submitted by Defendants Cathay Pacific Airways, LTD.

(Cathay Pacific) and Thai International Airways (Thai Airways),

finding that the rights and liabilities of those parties are

governed exclusively by the Warsaw Convention, 49 U.S.C. § 40104,

and Plaintiff's claims were barred for failure to give timely

notice. Covenant did not join the motion.

II. Relevant Facts

Covenant is a limited liability company organized under the

laws of the State of Illinois. (James Jacobson Dec. ¶ 3). The

sole member of Covenant is CAS Holdings, Inc. (CAS). (Id. at ¶ 4).

CAS is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of

Illinois and having its sole place of business in Illinois. (Id.

at ¶ 5). Plaintiff is, and at all times relevant here was, a

Case 4:04-cv-05334-CW Document 63 Filed 10/14/05 Page 2 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 3

resident of Alameda County, California.

DISCUSSION

Covenant contends that, because it is a citizen of Illinois

and Plaintiff is a citizen of California and the amount in

controversy exceeds $75,000, diversity jurisdiction persists in

this case.

District courts have original jurisdiction over all civil

actions "where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value

of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between . . . 

citizens of different States." 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). When federal

subject matter jurisdiction is predicated on diversity of

citizenship, complete diversity must exist between the opposing

parties. Owen Equip. & Erection Co. v. Kroger, 437 U.S. 365, 373-

74 (1978). If a case is filed in State court and a defendant seeks

removal to federal court, complete diversity generally must exist

at the time of the original action and at the time of the petition

for removal. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b); Pullman Co. v. Jenkins, 305 U.S.

534, 537, 539 (1939). 

At the time this case was removed, complete diversity did not

exist because Defendant San Francisco shared citizenship with

Plaintiff. Moor v. County of Alameda, 411 U.S. 693, 717-18 (1973)

(counties and cities are citizens of a State for diversity

purposes). Nevertheless, federal jurisdiction was properly

exercised pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441(d) and 1442(a)(1), because

Case 4:04-cv-05334-CW Document 63 Filed 10/14/05 Page 3 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 4

the complaint named a "foreign state" (Thai Airways) within the

meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1603 and an agency of the United States

(TSA) as defendants. Subsequently, Plaintiff dismissed his claims

against the non-diverse San Francisco as well as the TSA. Then, on

September 9, 2005, the Court granted summary judgment to Thai

Airways and Cathay Pacific. Thus, the claims against all nondiverse parties have been dismissed.

Covenant is a limited liability company. Federal courts have

treated the citizenship of limited liability corporations like that

of partnerships. See Handelsman v. Bedford Vill. Assoc. Ltd.

Partnership, 213 F.3d 48, 51-52 (2d Cir. 2000); Cosgrove v.

Bartolotta, 150 F.3d 729, 731 (7th Cir. 1998). Moreover, the

Supreme Court has held that the citizenship of limited liability

partnerships is not decided under the jurisdictional rule

established for corporations. Great S. Fire Proof Hotel Co. v.

Jones, 177 U.S. 449 (1900). Accordingly, Covenant's citizenship

"depends on the citizenship of all the members composing such

association." Carden v. Arkoma Ass'n, 494 U.S. 185, 195 (1990). 

CAS is the sole member of Covenant and is incorporated and has its

sole place of business in Illinois. Thus, Covenant is a citizen of

Illinois.

Plaintiff's complaint alleges, among other things, $73,000 in

damages to his motion picture film as well as a loss of $12,000,000

for a contract to produce a film. Thus, the amount in controversy

Case 4:04-cv-05334-CW Document 63 Filed 10/14/05 Page 4 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 5

exceeds $75,000.

Therefore, because the claims against all non-diverse parties

have been dismissed and the remaining parties are now diverse, the

Court retains jurisdiction over this case. 

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court will retain jurisdiction

over this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 10/14/05

___________________________ 

CLAUDIA WILKEN

United States District Judge

Case 4:04-cv-05334-CW Document 63 Filed 10/14/05 Page 5 of 5