AAEB5 Fund 17 LLC v. Duval & Stachenfeld, LLP

Background

The court received the plaintiffs’ proposed Amended Complaint and request to seal information. The opinion does not identify the underlying causes of action or resolve the parties’ substantive dispute.

Sealing request

The court partially granted the request. It authorized the plaintiffs to file on the public docket a redacted version of the list identifying the plaintiff limited liability companies’ members and their citizenships. The redactions had to be limited to identifying information for members with active immigration applications, and those members had to be referred to by their first and last initials.

Jurisdiction and required filings

The court found that the Amended Complaint still did not clearly allege diversity jurisdiction, which is federal jurisdiction based on the parties’ citizenship. The complaint stated that some plaintiff limited liability company members were citizens of California and New Jersey, and that all members of the defendant limited liability partnership were citizens of states other than New York. The court explained that, like other unincorporated entities, a limited liability partnership has the citizenship of each of its members.

To allow the court to determine whether diversity of citizenship existed, the plaintiffs were required to file a redacted version of the plaintiff members’ names and citizenships and a Second Amended Complaint detailing the citizenship of the defendant partnership’s members. The deadline was May 20, 2023.

Disposition

Judge Engelmayer partially granted the sealing request and ordered the specified filings. The opinion did not decide whether diversity jurisdiction ultimately existed or reach the merits of the underlying dispute.