Rumayor v. Mastercard International Inc.
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:23-cv-09280
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Rumayor v. Mastercard, Judge Engelmayer ordered clarification of Rumayor’s citizenship because it may affect diversity jurisdiction.
Rumayor and Mastercard International Inc.; the order concerns whether the court has diversity jurisdiction over Rumayor’s lawsuit.
What happened
In Rumayor v. Mastercard International Inc., Rumayor sued Mastercard under the court’s diversity jurisdiction. The complaint described Rumayor as a current domiciliary of Mexico and as a citizen of Mexico.
The court said it was unclear whether Rumayor is also a United States citizen. Under the law cited by the court, a lawsuit involving a United States citizen who is domiciled abroad cannot be based on diversity jurisdiction.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer directed Rumayor to respond about whether he is a United States citizen. The order did not make a final ruling on the court’s jurisdiction.
The detailed version
- Rumayor v. Mastercard International Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-09280
- Paul Engelmayer
- Oct. 27, 2023
Background
On October 20, 2023, Rumayor sued Mastercard International Inc., invoking the court’s diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The complaint described Rumayor as a current domiciliary of Mexico and stated in its jurisdiction and venue section that he was “a citizen of Mexico.”
Jurisdictional issue
The court sought clarification about whether Rumayor is a United States citizen. The court cited Second Circuit precedent interpreting 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) to mean that a lawsuit by or against United States citizens domiciled abroad cannot be based on diversity jurisdiction. The court therefore explained that, if Rumayor is a United States citizen domiciled in Mexico, the court would lack diversity jurisdiction.
Disposition
The court directed Rumayor to respond about whether he is a United States citizen. The order did not decide whether diversity jurisdiction exists and did not rule on the underlying claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.