Rodriguez v. Veridian Healthcare LLC
- James Oetken
- 1:22-cv-02989
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Rodriguez v. Veridian, Judge Torres ordered an amended complaint clarifying jurisdiction and venue, warning of dismissal or transfer if deficiencies remained.
Adriana Rodriguez and the proposed class members, as well as Veridian Healthcare LLC, because the case’s continuation in federal court and in the Southern District of New York depended on an amended pleading.
What happened
In Adriana Rodriguez v. Veridian Healthcare LLC, Rodriguez brought a proposed class action and relied on a federal law that allows certain class actions involving citizens of different states. She alleged that Veridian was a citizen of Illinois because its main business office was there.
The court explained that, because Veridian is identified as a limited liability company, the complaint must identify the citizenship of each of its members, including the required information for any entity members. The court also found that the complaint did not contain enough facts to establish that the Southern District of New York was the proper venue, even though it said Rodriguez lived, bought products, and received shipments in New York.
Judge Analisa Torres ordered Rodriguez to amend the complaint by April 20, 2022, to truthfully allege Veridian’s members’ citizenship and establish proper venue. The court warned that failure to establish complete diversity would lead to dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and that failure to establish proper venue could lead to transfer to an appropriate district.
The detailed version
- Rodriguez v. Veridian Healthcare LLC · No. 1:22-cv-02989
- James Oetken
- Apr. 13, 2022
Background
Adriana Rodriguez filed a proposed class action against Veridian Healthcare LLC. The complaint invoked the Class Action Fairness Act, a federal law that can give federal courts jurisdiction over certain class actions when at least one class member is a citizen of a different state from a defendant. Rodriguez alleged that Veridian was a citizen of Illinois because its principal place of business was in Gurnee, Illinois.
Jurisdiction Concern
The court explained that a limited liability company has the citizenship of each of its members. The complaint therefore needed to identify the citizenship of every individual member and, for any corporate member, the corporation’s state of incorporation and principal place of business. The court concluded that the complaint did not adequately provide this information.
Venue Concern
Venue is the proper federal district for a case. Rodriguez alleged that venue was proper in the Southern District of New York because she and many proposed class members lived there and because substantial events occurred there. But the complaint’s factual allegations stated only that Rodriguez was a New York citizen, viewed marketing materials and purchased products in New York, and had the products shipped to her New York home. The court stated that these allegations did not allow it to conclude that venue was proper in that district or that the case should not be transferred in the interest of justice.
Order
The court ordered Rodriguez to amend her pleading by April 20, 2022. The amended pleading had to truthfully allege the citizenship of each member of Veridian and establish complete diversity for federal jurisdiction. If Rodriguez failed to do so, the court stated that the complaint would be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The court also required her to truthfully establish that venue was proper in the Southern District of New York; otherwise, the court stated that it would transfer the action to an appropriate federal district. The opinion did not itself dismiss or transfer the action.
Classification
This is a procedural order because the court addressed subject-matter jurisdiction and venue without deciding the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.