UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

RENEE ESHCOFF, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO. 1:16-cv-00012-RLM-SLC

)

BAE SYSTEMS CONTROLS INC., et al., )

)

Defendants. )

OPINION AND ORDER

Defendants BAE Systems Controls Inc., and David Bernardini removed this case here

from Allen Superior Court based on diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). (DE

1). The notice of removal states that Plaintiff Renee Eshcoff alleges in her complaint: (1) that

she is a “resident of the state of Indiana”; (2) that BAE Systems Controls Inc., is a Delaware

corporation with its principal place of business in New York; and (3) that David Bernardini is a

“resident of the state of New York.” (DE 1 (quoting DE 5 ¶¶ 1, 6)).

Defendants’ jurisdictional allegations in the notice of removal are inadequate. The party

seeking to invoke federal diversity jurisdiction—in this instance, the Defendants—bears the

burden of demonstrating that the requirement of complete diversity has been met. See Chase v.

Shop’n Save Warehouse Foods, Inc., 110 F.3d 424, 427 (7th Cir. 1997). This requires showing

“total diversity as between all of the parties on one side of the versus sign and all of the parties

on the other side.” Jumah v. Sharma, 292 F. Supp. 2d 1121, 1121 (N.D. Ill. 2003) (citation

omitted). 

Residency is meaningless for purposes of diversity jurisdiction; an individual’s

citizenship is determined by his or her domicile. Dakuras v. Edwards, 312 F.3d 256, 258 (7th
Cir. 2002); see Heinen v. Northrop Grumman Corp., 671 F.3d 669, 670 (7th Cir. 2012)

(“[R]esidence may or may not demonstrate citizenship, which depends on domicile—that is to

say, the state in which a person intends to live over the long run.”); Guar. Nat’l Title Co. v.

J.E.G. Assocs., 101 F.3d 57, 58-59 (7th Cir. 1996) (explaining that statements concerning a

party’s “residency” are not proper allegations of citizenship as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1332). 

Therefore, Defendants must advise the Court of the domiciles of Plaintiff Renee Eshcoff and

Defendant David Bernardini. 

In alleging diversity jurisdiction, Defendants may not merely allege a “naked declaration

that there is diversity of citizenship.” Thomas v. Guardsmark, LLC, 487 F.3d 531, 533 (7th Cir.

2007). Also, allegations of federal subject matter jurisdiction must be made on personal

knowledge, not on the basis of information and belief. See Yount v. Shashek, 472 F. Supp. 2d

1055, 1057 n.1 (S.D. Ill. 2006) (citing Am.’s Best Inns, Inc. v. Best Inns of Abilene, L.P., 980

F.2d 1072, 1074 (7th Cir. 1992)); see also Ferolie Corp. v. Advantage Sales & Mktg., LLC, No.

04 C 5425, 2004 WL 2433114, at *1 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 28, 2004); Hayes v. Bass Pro Outdoor

World, LLC, No. 02 C 9106, 2003 WL 187411, at *2 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 21, 2003). Therefore,

Defendants’ reliance on Plaintiff’s allegations for setting forth their own citizenship is

inadequate, particularly where one allegation was conditioned “[u]pon information and belief” in

Plaintiff’s complaint. (DE 5 ¶ 6). 

Accordingly, Defendants are ORDERED to file an amended notice of removal on or

before January 26, 2016, that properly alleges the citizenship of all the parties.

SO ORDERED. Enter for this 12th day of January 2016.

/s/ Susan Collins 

Susan Collins

United States Magistrate Judge

2