Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 1, 2021

SBL Enterprises LLC v. Keystone Capital Corporation

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:21-cv-04459
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In SBL Enterprises v. Keystone Capital, Judge Vyskocil dismissed the complaint without prejudice and without leave to amend for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Who this affects

SBL Enterprises LLC and John Slater’s action against Keystone Capital Corporation, Frank Nocito, and Malcolm Taub was dismissed without prejudice and without leave to amend because the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.

What happened

SBL Enterprises LLC and John Slater sued Keystone Capital Corporation, Frank Nocito, and Malcolm Taub, invoking federal diversity jurisdiction. The court previously explained that the complaint did not properly allege the parties’ citizenship and gave the plaintiffs an opportunity to amend.

The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, but it changed only an allegation about Keystone Capital’s principal place of business in Connecticut. It did not address the other jurisdictional problems identified by the court, including missing allegations about the citizenship of SBL Enterprises LLC’s members, John Slater, Frank Nocito, and Malcolm Taub, and Keystone Capital’s state of incorporation.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ruled that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction and dismissed the action without prejudice and without leave to amend. The clerk was asked to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
SBL Enterprises LLC v. Keystone Capital Corporation · No. 1:21-cv-04459
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
July 1, 2021

Background

SBL Enterprises LLC and John Slater filed a complaint against Keystone Capital Corporation, Frank Nocito, and Malcolm Taub on May 18, 2021. They invoked diversity jurisdiction, which is federal jurisdiction based on the parties’ citizenship and the amount in dispute.

On May 19, 2021, the court dismissed the original complaint without prejudice and with leave to amend because it did not adequately plead subject matter jurisdiction. The court identified several defects: the complaint did not allege the citizenship of the members of SBL Enterprises LLC; it did not allege the citizenship or domicile of John Slater, Frank Nocito, or Malcolm Taub; and it did not properly allege Keystone Capital Corporation’s citizenship, including its state of incorporation. The court directed the plaintiffs to file an amended complaint by June 19, 2021, and warned that failing to do so would result in dismissal without prejudice and without leave to amend.

Amended Complaint

The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on May 20, 2021. According to the opinion, it was identical to the original complaint except that it alleged Keystone Capital’s principal place of business was in Connecticut. The court found that the amended complaint still had the same jurisdictional defects and did not cure, or even attempt to cure, the deficiencies identified in the May 19 order.

Ruling

Because the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, it dismissed the amended complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3). The court declined to give the plaintiffs another opportunity to amend because they had been informed of the jurisdictional defects and failed to address them in the amended complaint.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered that the action be dismissed without prejudice and without leave to amend for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The clerk was respectfully requested to close the case.

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.