Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 31, 2024

PreREO LLC v. Theecode Technologies Private Limited

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:24-cv-00495
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In PreREO LLC v. Theecode Technologies Private Limited, Judge Torres ordered PreREO to clarify its members’ citizenship or face dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.

Who this affects

PreREO LLC must amend its complaint to provide the required citizenship allegations. The case against Theecode Technologies Private Limited could be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction if PreREO does not do so.

What happened

In PreREO LLC v. Theecode Technologies Private Limited, PreREO LLC sued Theecode Technologies Private Limited and relied on a federal rule allowing cases between citizens of different states or countries.

The court said that, if PreREO is a limited liability company, its complaint must identify the citizenship of every person or entity that is a member. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.

The court ordered PreREO to amend its complaint by February 9, 2024. Judge Analisa Torres warned that the complaint will be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction if PreREO does not truthfully show complete diversity based on the citizenship of each member.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
PreREO LLC v. Theecode Technologies Private Limited · No. 1:24-cv-00495
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
Jan. 31, 2024

Background

PreREO LLC brought an action against Theecode Technologies Private Limited and invoked diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Diversity jurisdiction is a federal court’s authority to hear certain cases involving parties with different citizenships.

The Court’s Concern

The court explained that, if PreREO is a limited liability company, the complaint must identify the citizenship of each of its members. For individual members, the complaint must allege their citizenship. For corporate members, it must allege the state or country of incorporation and the principal place of business. The opinion does not identify PreREO’s members or describe the action’s underlying claims.

Order

The court ordered PreREO to amend its pleading by February 9, 2024, to allege the citizenship of every constituent person or entity. The court stated that, if PreREO fails to amend by that date to truthfully allege complete diversity, the complaint will be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The order did not dismiss the complaint at that time and did not reach the merits of the underlying dispute.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.