OnePlus USA Corp. v. Phobio LLC
- John Cronan
- 1:25-cv-04453
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In OnePlus USA Corp. v. Phobio LLC, Judge Cronan ordered briefing before deciding OnePlus’s default-judgment motion.
OnePlus USA Corp. must provide the ordered briefing, disclosure, and service. Phobio LLC must be served with the order and the letter brief. The court’s consideration of jurisdiction and OnePlus’s default-judgment motion is affected.
What happened
In OnePlus USA Corp. v. Phobio LLC, OnePlus asked the court to enter a default judgment against Phobio. The court scheduled a hearing for November 5, 2025, but did not decide the motion in this order.
The court ordered OnePlus to explain whether its amended complaint adequately establishes federal diversity jurisdiction, properly alleges its contract claims, and supports default judgment even though the alleged trade-in agreement was not attached. The court also required a disclosure identifying the citizenship of the people or entities whose citizenship is attributed to Phobio.
Judge John P. Cronan ordered OnePlus to file a letter brief by October 29, 2025, and to serve the order and brief on Phobio by overnight courier. The court warned that it may dismiss the action without prejudice if jurisdiction is not adequately shown, but made no final ruling on dismissal or default judgment.
The detailed version
- OnePlus USA Corp. v. Phobio LLC · No. 1:25-cv-04453
- John Cronan
- Oct. 24, 2025
Background
OnePlus USA Corp. moved for default judgment against Phobio LLC. The court scheduled a hearing on that motion for November 5, 2025. Before the hearing, the court ordered OnePlus to file a letter brief addressing three issues.
Diversity jurisdiction
The court questioned whether the amended complaint adequately pleaded diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1). Because Phobio is alleged to be a limited liability company, its citizenship depends on the citizenship of its members. The amended complaint alleges that Phobio’s two members are individuals residing in Michigan and Georgia, but the court explained that an individual’s domicile—not residence—determines citizenship for diversity purposes. OnePlus must show cause why the court may exercise subject-matter jurisdiction, or authority over the case, under § 1332(a). The court stated that it may dismiss the action without prejudice if jurisdiction is not adequately established.
The court also ordered OnePlus to file a disclosure statement identifying every individual or entity whose citizenship is attributed to Phobio and stating each such person’s or entity’s citizenship, as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1(a)(2).
Pleading of contract claims
OnePlus seeks default judgment on claims for breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and maintains that New York law governs those claims. The court directed OnePlus to explain whether the amended complaint adequately alleges the required elements of both causes of action. In particular, the court noted that the complaint alleges Phobio erroneously issued an additional bonus but does not explain how that conduct injured OnePlus.
Missing agreement
The amended complaint alleges that the Phobio Trade-In Agreement, dated April 30, 2019, is attached as Exhibit A. The court observed that the agreement was not actually attached to the amended complaint, and also had not been attached to the original complaint despite a similar allegation. OnePlus must address whether the missing agreement affects the court’s ability to grant default judgment.
Order
The court ordered OnePlus to file the letter brief by October 29, 2025. Within two days of the order, OnePlus must serve Phobio with a copy of the order by overnight courier and file proof of service. OnePlus must similarly serve the letter brief within two days after filing it and file proof of that service. The order does not grant or deny the default-judgment motion and does not dismiss the action.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.