Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 4, 2024

Ugalde v. ASInc.

Judge
Nathanael Cousins
Docket
5:24-cv-08684
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Ugalde v. ASInc., Judge Cousins ordered defendants to explain by December 18 why the case should not return to state court for lack of jurisdiction.

Who this affects

The defendants must respond to the court’s jurisdictional order, and the case may be returned to state court if subject matter jurisdiction is not established.

What happened

In Ugalde v. ASInc., defendants removed the case to federal court and claimed that the court had diversity jurisdiction because the plaintiff resides in California and the defendants have principal places of business in Nebraska and Delaware.

The court explained that an LLC’s citizenship includes every state where its owners or members are citizens. Because defendants had not provided information about Syngenta Flowers, LLC’s owners or members, the court could not determine whether complete diversity existed.

The court ordered defendants to show cause in writing by December 18, 2024, why the case should not be sent back to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Judge Nathanael M. Cousins did not order a remand in this opinion.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Ugalde v. ASInc. · No. 5:24-cv-08684
Judge
Nathanael Cousins
Date
Dec. 4, 2024

Background

Defendants removed this case from state court to federal court. They asserted diversity jurisdiction, which generally requires complete diversity of citizenship between the parties and an amount in controversy greater than $75,000. Defendants stated that Plaintiff Antonia Verde Ugalde resides in California, Defendant Advance Services, Inc. has its principal place of business in Nebraska, and Defendant Syngenta Flowers, LLC has its principal place of business in Delaware.

Jurisdictional issue

The court explained that an LLC is a citizen of every state of which its owners or members are citizens. The notice of removal did not provide information about the citizenship of Syngenta Flowers’s owners or members. Without that information, the court could not determine whether complete diversity existed.

Order

The court ordered defendants to show cause in writing by December 18, 2024, why the case should not be remanded to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The opinion did not itself order remand or resolve the jurisdiction question. Judge Nathanael M. Cousins issued the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.