Dorilton Capital Management LLC v. Stilus LLC
- Rochon
- 1:23-cv-03789
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Dorilton Capital Management LLC v. Stilus LLC, Judge Rochon ordered jurisdiction disclosures and warned the case could be dismissed.
The plaintiffs, Dorilton Capital Management LLC and Williams IP Holdings LLC, must file the required disclosure statement and jurisdictional materials by May 15, 2023. The action could be dismissed if they cannot allege a good-faith basis for complete diversity of citizenship.
What happened
In Dorilton Capital Management LLC v. Stilus LLC, the plaintiffs brought a lawsuit based on diversity of citizenship, which requires the parties to be citizens of different states or countries.
The court said the plaintiffs had not filed the required disclosure statement or provided enough information about the citizenship of the members of the two limited liability companies. It ordered them to file both a disclosure statement and a letter supported by sworn affidavits by May 15, 2023. If they could not show a good-faith basis for complete diversity, the action would be dismissed without further notice.
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon issued the order on May 8, 2023.
The detailed version
- Dorilton Capital Management LLC v. Stilus LLC · No. 1:23-cv-03789
- Rochon
- May 8, 2023
Background
Dorilton Capital Management LLC and Williams IP Holdings LLC filed a complaint against Stilus LLC and Claudia Schwarz. The complaint asserted that the court had subject-matter jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship. The opinion recounts the complaint's allegations about the organizational forms, citizenship, and addresses of the parties.
Jurisdictional Requirements
For diversity jurisdiction, a limited liability company is treated as a citizen of every state or country of which its members are citizens. If an LLC's members include other non-corporate entities, the parties must identify and provide the citizenship of members through the ownership chain until every individual and corporation with a direct or indirect interest is identified. An individual's citizenship for diversity purposes is based on domicile: the person's true fixed home and principal place of establishment, to which the person intends to return.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1 also requires a party to file a disclosure statement with its first appearance or pleading. The court found that the plaintiffs had not satisfied these requirements.
Order
The court ordered the plaintiffs to file a completed Rule 7.1 Disclosure Statement by May 15, 2023. It separately ordered them, by the same date, to file a letter supported by one or more sworn affidavits providing the information needed for the court to exercise subject-matter jurisdiction, including the identity and citizenship of the members of each LLC. The court stated that if the plaintiffs could not allege a good-faith basis for complete diversity of citizenship, the action would be dismissed without further notice to the parties.
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon issued the order. The opinion does not state that the action was dismissed at that time.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.