Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled June 21, 2023

Yolked, Inc. v. CFG Merchant Solutions, LLC

Judge
Nathanael Cousins
Docket
5:23-cv-02216
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Yolked, Inc. v. CFG Merchant Solutions, Judge Cousins ordered CFG to explain federal jurisdiction and vacated the motion-to-dismiss hearing.

Who this affects

CFG Merchant Solutions, LLC must explain the basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction; Yolked, Inc. and Jim Angelopoulos may file an optional reply. The pending motion-to-dismiss hearing was vacated.

What happened

Yolked, Inc. v. CFG Merchant Solutions, LLC concerns a case that CFG removed from Santa Clara County Superior Court to federal court. The opinion says CFG had to establish that federal subject matter jurisdiction existed.

The court questioned whether the parties were citizens of different states, because an LLC's citizenship depends on the citizenship of all its owners or members. It ordered CFG to explain in writing by June 26, 2023, why the case should not be sent back to state court. Yolked and Jim Angelopoulos could file an optional reply by June 29, 2023.

The court did not decide CFG's pending motion to dismiss and canceled the June 28 hearing on that motion. Judge Nathanael M. Cousins said the hearing could be reset if needed after the jurisdiction issue was decided.

The detailed version

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

Case
Yolked, Inc. v. CFG Merchant Solutions, LLC · No. 5:23-cv-02216
Judge
Nathanael Cousins
Date
June 21, 2023

Background

CFG Merchant Solutions, LLC removed this case from Santa Clara County Superior Court to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. A party that removes a case must establish federal subject matter jurisdiction, meaning the federal court's legal authority to hear the case.

Jurisdiction issue

The court explained that federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and must presume that jurisdiction is absent until the party invoking it establishes otherwise. It also explained that an LLC is a citizen of every state in which its owners or members are citizens. The LLC's state of formation or the state where it does business does not determine its citizenship for this purpose.

Because the citizenship of CFG's owners or members was relevant to whether the parties were citizens of different states, the court ordered CFG to show cause—in other words, to explain in writing—why the case should not be returned to Santa Clara County Superior Court for failure to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction.

Order

CFG had to provide its written explanation by June 26, 2023. Plaintiffs could file an optional reply by June 29, 2023.

The court stated that it would not rule on CFG's pending motion to dismiss until the subject matter jurisdiction issue was determined. It therefore vacated the June 28 hearing on that motion and said it would reset the hearing if needed. The opinion does not decide whether federal jurisdiction exists, whether the case will be returned to state court, or whether the motion to dismiss will be granted or denied.

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.