JDM Import Co. Inc. v. Shree Ramkrishna Exports Pvt. Ltd.
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:22-cv-04042
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In JDM Import v. Shree Ramkrishna Exports, Judge Furman ordered plaintiffs to correct citizenship allegations or face dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.
The plaintiffs—JDM Import Co. Inc., MG Worldwide LLC, and Asia Pacific Jewelry, LLC—must amend their complaint to plead citizenship information. The order also affects defendants Amit Shah, Shree Ramkrishna Exports Pvt., Ltd., and The Jewelry Co., because the court’s jurisdiction depends on establishing complete diversity between the parties.
What happened
JDM Import Co. Inc. v. Shree Ramkrishna Exports Pvt. Ltd. concerns plaintiffs JDM Import Co. Inc., MG Worldwide LLC, and Asia Pacific Jewelry, LLC’s lawsuit against Amit Shah, Shree Ramkrishna Exports Pvt., Ltd., and The Jewelry Co. Plaintiffs relied on diversity of citizenship to establish federal jurisdiction.
The court said the complaint did not properly allege the citizenship of each member of the defendant limited liability companies. It also said the complaint listed business addresses instead of affirmatively stating the parties’ citizenship, which is required for diversity jurisdiction.
Judge Jesse M. Furman ordered plaintiffs to amend the complaint by May 25, 2022, to provide the required citizenship information. The court stated that if plaintiffs could not truthfully allege complete diversity by that date, it would dismiss the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction without further notice.
The detailed version
- JDM Import Co. Inc. v. Shree Ramkrishna Exports Pvt. Ltd. · No. 1:22-cv-04042
- Valerie Caproni
- May 20, 2022
Background
JDM Import Co. Inc., MG Worldwide LLC, and Asia Pacific Jewelry, LLC sued Amit Shah, Shree Ramkrishna Exports Pvt., Ltd., and The Jewelry Co. The plaintiffs invoked federal jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The complaint alleged that the plaintiffs’ principal places of business were in New York and that the defendants were based in India.
Jurisdictional pleading problem
For diversity jurisdiction, an LLC is treated as a citizen of every state of which its members are citizens. A complaint must therefore identify the citizenship of the individuals and entities that make up each LLC, including members that are themselves LLCs. The court also explained that a party’s citizenship must be affirmatively alleged; listing a business address is not enough.
The court found that the complaint did not affirmatively allege the citizenship of each member of the defendant LLCs. It also found that the complaint alleged business addresses rather than the citizenship of the parties.
Order
The court ordered the plaintiffs to amend their complaint by May 25, 2022, to affirmatively allege the citizenship of each person or entity comprising the defendant LLCs and the citizenship of all individual parties. The court did not dismiss the complaint at that time. Instead, it stated that if the plaintiffs could not truthfully allege complete diversity by the deadline, the complaint would be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction without further notice. Judge Jesse M. Furman signed the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.