Doubet Consulting, LLC v. Rackspace Technology, Inc.
- Rochon
- 1:23-cv-00526
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Doubet Consulting v. Rackspace, Judge Rochon ordered plaintiffs to amend jurisdiction allegations or face dismissal without prejudice.
The plaintiffs, Doubet Consulting, LLC and GL2 Partners, Inc., were required to amend their complaint to allege each party’s citizenship. Rackspace Technology, Inc. was affected because its citizenship was missing from the jurisdictional allegations. The case faced dismissal without prejudice if the deficiency was not corrected.
What happened
In Doubet Consulting, LLC v. Rackspace Technology, Inc., the plaintiffs relied on the Class Action Fairness Act to establish federal jurisdiction, but their complaint did not state Rackspace’s citizenship.
The complaint identified Doubet Consulting, LLC as a New York citizen and GL2 Partners, Inc. as a Texas citizen. But it provided no information about Rackspace’s citizenship, leaving the court unable to determine whether the required minimal diversity existed.
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon ordered the plaintiffs to file an amended complaint alleging every party’s citizenship by February 1, 2023. Judge Rochon stated that the court would dismiss the case without prejudice and without further notice if the amended complaint did not establish subject-matter jurisdiction.
The detailed version
- Doubet Consulting, LLC v. Rackspace Technology, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-00526
- Rochon
- Jan. 24, 2023
Background
On January 23, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a complaint invoking the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), a federal statute that can provide jurisdiction over certain class actions, under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d). Plaintiffs alleged that Doubet Consulting, LLC was a citizen of New York and that GL2 Partners, Inc. was a citizen of Texas.
Jurisdictional Deficiency
The complaint stated that some plaintiffs, class members, and Rackspace Technology, Inc. were citizens of different states, but it did not allege Rackspace’s citizenship. The court explained that the party claiming federal subject-matter jurisdiction has the burden of establishing it. Because the complaint lacked information about the defendant’s citizenship, Plaintiffs had not established the minimal diversity required under CAFA.
Order
The court ordered Plaintiffs to file an amended complaint properly alleging the citizenship of each party no later than February 1, 2023. The court did not dismiss the case at that time. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon stated that if Plaintiffs failed to file an amended complaint establishing subject-matter jurisdiction by that date, the court would dismiss the case without prejudice and without further notice.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.