Pivkina v. McQuilling Partners
- Lewis Kaplan
- 1:26-cv-07038
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate.
In Valeriya Pivkina v. McQuilling Partners, Judge Kaplan ordered an amended removal notice by August 28 or dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Valeriya Pivkina and the defendants in the removed action; the case may be dismissed if an adequate amended notice of removal is not filed by August 28, 2026.
What happened
In Valeriya Pivkina v. McQuilling Partners, Inc., et al., the court reviewed the notice removing the case to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
The court found that the notice did not adequately allege the parties’ citizenship, which is required to establish the court’s authority to hear the case. The opinion identified possible deficiencies involving natural persons, corporations, partnerships, and limited liability companies.
The court ordered that an amended removal notice adequately alleging federal subject-matter jurisdiction be filed by August 28, 2026. Otherwise, the action will be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The order was issued by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan.
The detailed version
- Pivkina v. McQuilling Partners · No. 1:26-cv-07038
- Lewis Kaplan
- Aug. 19, 2026
Background
The case was removed to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The notice of removal invoked federal jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, which concerns the court’s authority to hear certain cases involving parties from different states or countries.
Court’s Analysis
The court held that the notice of removal failed to adequately allege the existence of subject-matter jurisdiction. Specifically, the court identified possible deficiencies in the allegations concerning:
- the citizenship of one or more natural persons; - the citizenship of one or more corporations; - the citizenship of one or more partnerships; and - the exact nature and citizenship of one or more alleged limited liability companies.
The court stated that these issues were possible deficiencies “among other things.” The opinion does not identify which particular party allegations were inadequate or state any party’s citizenship.
Ruling
The court ordered that an amended notice of removal adequately alleging subject-matter jurisdiction be filed on or before August 28, 2026. The court stated that, absent that filing, the action will be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The order did not itself dismiss the action. Judge Lewis A. Kaplan signed the order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.