Lazar v. Cyclacel Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:25-cv-06449
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Lazar v. Cyclacel Pharmaceuticals, Judge Engelmayer ordered more information about citizenship before deciding whether federal jurisdiction exists.
David Lazar must provide the additional information about the parties’ citizenship and corporate details by August 15, 2025. The order also affects Cyclacel Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Datuk Dr. Doris Wong Sing Ee, and the court’s ability to determine whether federal jurisdiction exists.
What happened
In Lazar v. Cyclacel Pharmaceuticals, Inc., David Lazar sued Cyclacel Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Datuk Dr. Doris Wong Sing Ee, relying only on diversity of citizenship for federal jurisdiction. The complaint identified Lazar as a citizen of Panama, Wong Sing Ee as a citizen of Malaysia, and Cyclacel as a citizen of Delaware and Malaysia.
The court said the complaint did not clearly establish the required diversity. It explained that federal diversity jurisdiction generally does not exist when foreign citizens are on both sides of a dispute. The court ordered Lazar to file a letter by August 15, 2025, identifying every party’s citizenship, the incorporation and principal business locations of any corporations, and the facts supporting those statements.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer issued the order on August 7, 2025. The order required additional jurisdictional information but did not decide the underlying dispute or state that the case was dismissed.
The detailed version
- Lazar v. Cyclacel Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · No. 1:25-cv-06449
- Paul Engelmayer
- Aug. 7, 2025
Background
David Lazar filed a complaint against Cyclacel Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Datuk Dr. Doris Wong Sing Ee. The complaint asserted diversity of citizenship as the sole basis for federal jurisdiction. It alleged that Lazar is a citizen of Panama, Wong Sing Ee is a citizen of Malaysia, and Cyclacel is a citizen of Delaware and Malaysia.
Jurisdictional issue
The court stated that the complaint did not clearly establish the citizenship diversity required for jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Relying on Second Circuit precedent, the court explained that diversity jurisdiction is absent when foreign citizens are on both sides of the dispute in the circumstances described by that precedent. The court also noted that a corporation’s relevant citizenship includes its place of incorporation and principal place of business.
Order
The court ordered Lazar to file an electronic letter by August 15, 2025. The letter must provide the citizenship of all parties, the place of incorporation and principal place of business of any corporate entities, and the factual bases for those conclusions. Judge Paul A. Engelmayer did not rule on the merits of Lazar’s claims and did not dismiss the case in this order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.