Luxwear Ltd. v. Adaptive Research & Development Group, LLC
- Analisa Torres
- 1:22-cv-05458
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
Luxwear v. Adaptive: Judge Torres ordered plaintiffs to amend citizenship allegations or face dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Luxwear Ltd. and Seven Trade LLC, which were required to amend their complaint; the case could be dismissed if they failed to provide the required citizenship allegations.
What happened
In Luxwear Ltd. and Seven Trade LLC v. Adaptive Research & Development Group, LLC, the plaintiffs brought the case based on diversity jurisdiction, which requires the parties to be citizens of different states.
The court explained that a limited liability company has the citizenship of each of its members. It ordered the plaintiffs to amend their complaint by July 15, 2022, to identify the citizenship of every person or entity connected to the defendant company. The court had not yet dismissed the case.
Judge Torres warned that if the plaintiffs did not truthfully allege complete diversity by the deadline, the complaint would be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
The detailed version
- Luxwear Ltd. v. Adaptive Research & Development Group, LLC · No. 1:22-cv-05458
- Analisa Torres
- July 8, 2022
Background
Luxwear Ltd. and Seven Trade LLC sued Adaptive Research & Development Group, LLC, doing business as Adaptive Biomed. The plaintiffs invoked diversity jurisdiction, a form of federal jurisdiction based on the parties being citizens of different states. The complaint alleged that Adaptive Research & Development Group was a Tennessee limited liability company.
Court’s Analysis
The court explained that a limited liability company has the citizenship of each of its members. Therefore, a complaint relying on diversity jurisdiction must identify the citizenship of each individual member and, for any company that is a member, its state of incorporation and principal place of business. The court concluded that the complaint needed additional jurisdictional allegations.
Order and Effect
The court ordered the plaintiffs to amend their pleading by July 15, 2022, to allege the citizenship of each constituent person or entity. The allegations had to truthfully establish complete diversity. The court stated that if the plaintiffs failed to amend by that date, the complaint would be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The order did not decide the merits of the parties’ underlying dispute. Judge Analisa Torres signed the order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.