Jingo Juice Ltd. T/A Marshmallow Laser Feast v. Digital Abstract, LLC
- P. Castel
- 1:24-cv-08153
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Jingo Juice v. Digital Abstract, Judge Castel required more citizenship allegations before deciding jurisdiction and paused the plaintiff’s judgment motion.
Jingo Juice must investigate and amend its jurisdictional allegations, while Digital Abstract must provide the ordered citizenship information. The case may be dismissed if complete diversity is not adequately alleged.
What happened
Jingo Juice Ltd. T/A Marshmallow Laser Feast v. Digital Abstract, LLC concerns whether the complaint adequately showed that the federal court has authority to hear the case based on the parties’ citizenship. The complaint identified Jingo Juice as a United Kingdom private limited company and Digital Abstract as a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business in Connecticut.
The court said the complaint did not provide enough information about Digital Abstract’s members to determine its citizenship. It allowed Jingo Juice to send one question to Digital Abstract about the citizenship of its members and required Digital Abstract to respond. Jingo Juice may then amend the complaint to provide the required jurisdictional information.
The court ordered that the complaint be amended within 30 days and warned that the case will be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction if complete diversity is not alleged. The court also held Jingo Juice’s unopposed motion for entry of judgment in abeyance while awaiting an adequate amended complaint. Judge Castel issued the order.
The detailed version
- Jingo Juice Ltd. T/A Marshmallow Laser Feast v. Digital Abstract, LLC · No. 1:24-cv-08153
- P. Castel
- June 4, 2025
Background
Jingo Juice’s complaint relied only on diversity of citizenship as the basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction. The complaint alleged that Jingo Juice is a private limited company organized under United Kingdom law with its principal place of business in the United Kingdom. It alleged that Digital Abstract is a limited liability company organized under Delaware law with its principal place of business in Connecticut.
Jurisdictional Issue
The court explained that complete diversity requires every plaintiff to be diverse from every defendant. For a limited liability company, citizenship depends on the citizenship of each member. The complaint did not identify the natural persons who are members of Digital Abstract or, if any member is a corporation, that corporation’s place of incorporation and principal place of business. The court also stated that Jingo Juice must clarify whether its organizational structure is equivalent to a corporation or to a limited liability company. If it is equivalent to a limited liability company, the complaint must identify the citizenship of all members.
Order
The court allowed Jingo Juice, within 14 days of the order, to serve Digital Abstract with one interrogatory asking for the citizenship of all of Digital Abstract’s natural-person members and specified information about any corporate members. Digital Abstract must respond within 14 days.
The court ordered Jingo Juice to amend its complaint within 30 days to truthfully and accurately allege Digital Abstract’s citizenship and to provide the required information about Jingo Juice’s own organizational structure and citizenship. The court stated that if Jingo Juice fails to allege complete diversity by that deadline, the action will be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction without further notice.
Jingo Juice had also filed an unopposed motion for entry of judgment based on Digital Abstract’s affidavit of confession of judgment. The court did not decide that motion; it held the motion in abeyance pending an amended pleading that adequately alleges federal subject matter jurisdiction. The order addressed jurisdictional pleading requirements and did not decide the underlying dispute.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.