Active Ideas, LLC v. Inspired Motion, LLC
| Active Ideas, LLC |
| Inspired Motion, LLC |
| 1:2021cv00424 |
| January 25, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Ronald A Guzman |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 5, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 ENTERED JUDGMENT. Mailed notice. (kp, ) |
| Filing 8 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Plaintiff's supplemental jurisdictional statement fails to establish the Court's subject-matter jurisdiction over this case. The complaint is premised on diversity jurisdiction, and the parties are two limited liability companies ("LLCs"). As previously noted, an LLC takes the citizenship of its members. Thomas v. Guardsmark, LLC, 487 F.3d 531, 533-34 (7th Cir. 2007). In paragraph 3 of its supplemental statement, plaintiff states that it is "owned and operated by" five individuals, who are listed along with their domiciles. It is unclear from the wording of paragraph 3 whether these five individuals are the only members of plaintiff. (If they are, then plaintiff's citizenship has been properly alleged, and plaintiff is a citizen of Hawaii, Illinois, and Michigan.) More importantly, however, plaintiff states that defendant is a Japanese LLC, also known as a Godo Kaisha, but fails to identify its members and their citizenships, as specifically directed in the Court's previous order. Plaintiff merely alleges that defendant is "owned and operated by" Ross K. Purdie, an individual domiciled in Japan. If plaintiff is attempting to allege that the defendant Japanese LLC's member is Purdie, a United States citizen domiciled in Japan, the Court would not have subject-matter jurisdiction in any event. The defendant LLC would take Purdie's citizenship, and a United States citizen who is domiciled abroad is considered stateless for the purpose of diversity jurisdiction, thus destroying subject-matter jurisdiction. See Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. Global Caravan Techs., Inc., No. 16-3535, 2018 WL 1508565, at *1 (7th Cir. 2018) (citing Newman-Green, Inc. v. Alfonzo-Larrain, 490 U.S. 826, 828 (1989)). This case is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice. (kp, ) |
| Filing 7 PLAINTIFF'S SUPPLEMENTAL JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT by Active Ideas, LLC (Shah, Paras) |
| Filing 6 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Active Ideas, LLC by William T. McGrath (McGrath, William) |
| Filing 5 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: This is an action for breach of contract (and, in the alternative, account stated and quantum meruit). The complaint is premised on diversity jurisdiction but is deficient with respect to the parties' citizenships. Both plaintiff and defendant are alleged to be limited liability companies ("LLCs"). Plaintiff sets forth the parties' places of organization and principal places of business, but those allegations are jurisdictionally irrelevant for LLCs. The citizenship of an LLC is the citizenship of each of its members. Thomas v. Guardsmark, LLC, 487 F.3d 531, 533-34 (7th Cir. 2007). Accordingly, plaintiff is directed to file by 2/5/2021 a jurisdictional supplement to its complaint that identifies the parties' citizenships by the citizenships of all of their members, identifying the members, specifying the type of entity of each member, and tracing citizenship through however many layers of members there may be. It will not suffice to simply state that none of plaintiff's members have the same citizenships as any of defendant's members, or to identify only one side's members and state that the other side's members do not have the same citizenships. Id. at 534. If nothing is filed by the above date, or if the supplement still does not properly set out the parties' citizenships, this action may be dismissed for want of subject-matter jurisdiction. Mailed notice (mjc, ) |
| Filing 4 PAYMENT regarding #1 of Filing fee $ 402, receipt number 0752-17865697. (Shah, Paras) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Shah, Paras) |
| Filing 2 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Active Ideas, LLC by Paras R. Shah (Shah, Paras) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Active Ideas, LLC; (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-C)(Shah, Paras) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable M. David Weisman. Case assignment: Random assignment. (jmk, ) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Illinois Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Active Ideas, LLC v. Inspired Motion, LLC | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Active Ideas, LLC | |
| Represented By: | Paras R. Shah |
| Represented By: | William T. McGrath |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Inspired Motion, LLC | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
