Perez v. Luster Products, Inc. et al
| Quiana Perez |
| Luster Products, Inc., L'Oreal USA, Inc., L'Oreal USA Products, Inc., SoftSheen-Carson LLC, SoftSheen-Carson (W.I.), Inc., Strength of Nature, LLC, Godrej SON Holdings, Inc., Beauty Bell Enterprises, LLC., d/b/a House of Cheatham, Inc. and Beauty Bell Enterprises, LLC. doing business as House of Cheatham, Inc. |
| 1:2023cv01159 |
| February 24, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Mary M Rowland |
| Steven C Seeger |
| Personal Injury: Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury Product Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Product Liability |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 11, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ORDER: Case reassigned to the Honorable Mary M. Rowland for all further proceedings pursuant to the provisions of Local Rule 40.4. Honorable Steven C. Seeger no longer assigned to the case. Signed by Executive Committee on 4/11/2023. (jn, ) |
| Filing 8 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: An initial status report is due by May 12, 2023. Counsel must read the Standing Order entitled "Initial Status Conferences and Joint Initial Status Reports" on the Court's website. The parties must confer as required by Rule 26(f) about the nature, scope, and duration of discovery. The parties must submit two documents to the Court. First, the parties must file the Joint Initial Status Report under Rule 26(f) on the docket. A Word version of the Joint Initial Status Report is available on the Court's website. All parties must participate in the preparation and filing of the Joint Initial Status Report. The Court requires a joint report, so a filing by one side or the other is not sufficient. Second, the parties must email a Word version of a proposed Scheduling Order under Rule 16(b) to the Court's proposed order inbox. Lead counsel for the parties must participate in filing the initial status report. Plaintiff must serve this Order on all other parties. If the defendant has not been served with process, plaintiff's counsel must contact the Courtroom Deputy at jessica_j_ramos@ilnd.uscourts.gov to reschedule the initial status report deadline. Plaintiff should not file the Joint Initial Status Report before the defendant(s) has been served with process. The parties must discuss settlement in good faith and make a serious attempt to resolve this case amicably. All counsel of record must read and comply with this Court's Standing Orders on its webpage. Please pay special attention to the Standing Orders about Depositions and Discovery. Mailed notice. (jjr, ) |
| Filing 7 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The motions for leave toa ppear pro hac vice (Dckt. Nos. #5 and #6 ) are granted. Attorney Navan Ward, Jr. and Aigner Kolom are added as counsel for Quiana Perez. Mailed notice (jjr, ) |
| Filing 6 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Filing fee $ 150, receipt number AILNDC-20393334. (Kolom, Aigner) |
| Filing 5 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Filing fee $ 150, receipt number AILNDC-20393235. (Ward, Navan) |
| Filing 4 First AMENDED complaint by Quiana Perez against All Defendants (Neiman, David) |
| Filing 3 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The Court took a look at the complaint in this new case. Plaintiff Quiana Perez filed suit against eight defendants, including a collection of corporations and limited liability companies. The complaint invokes this Court's diversity jurisdiction, but the jurisdictional allegations are insufficient. So the complaint is stricken. A corporation and a limited liability company are not the same thing. The differences include citizenship. A corporation is a citizen where it is incorporated and where it has its principal place of business. But a limited liability company is a citizen wherever its members are citizens. It makes no difference where a limited liability company is registered, or where it has its principal place of business. For an LLC, the citizenship of its members is all that matters. See Belleville Catering Co. v. Champaign Mkt. Place, LLC, 350 F.3d 691, 692 (7th Cir. 2003); Martin v. Living Essentials, LLC, 653 Fed. Appx. 482, 485 (7th Cir. 2016) ("[T]he home 'base' of a limited liability company, or LLC, is irrelevant, given that an LLC has the citizenship of each of its members."); Thomas v. Guardmark, LLC, 487 F.3d 531, 534 (7th Cir. 2007) ("For diversity jurisdictional purposes, the citizenship of an LLC is the citizenship of each of its members."); Cosgrove v. Bartolotta, 150 F.3d 729, 731 (7th Cir. 1998) ("[T]he citizenship of an LLC for purposes of the diversity jurisdiction is the citizenship of its members."); Fellowes, Inc. v. Changzhou Xinrui Fellowes Office Equip. Co., 759 F.3d 787, 787-88 (7th Cir. 2014). It is not good enough to state that a party is not a citizen of State X, Y, or Z. See West v. Louisville Gas & Elec. Co., 951 F.3d 827, 829 (7th Cir. 2020) ("We've held repeatedly that there's no such thing as a [state name here] partnership or LLC, that only the partners' or members' citizenships matter, and that their identities and citizenships must be revealed.") (brackets and emphasis in original); West, 951 F.3d at 829 ("We do not blithely accept assurances along the lines of 'no one on our side is a citizen of the opposing litigant's state.'"); Guar. Nat'l Title Co., Inc. v. J.E.G. Assocs., 101 F.3d 57, 58-59 (7th Cir. 1996); America's Best Inns, Inc. v. Best Inns of Abilene, LP, 980 F.2d 1072, 1073 (7th Cir. 1992) ("[N]either of the affidavits identifies the limited partners at the time the complaint was filed. It is impossible to determine diversity of citizenship without knowing who the persons in questions in question are. And litigants instructed to specify the partners and their citizenship may not respond with a vacuous statement such as 'no partner is a citizen of Illinois.' How can anyone tell?"). Here, Plaintiff sued two LLC, without identifying the members. For example, the complaint alleges that "Defendant Softsheen-Carson LLC is... a corporation [wrong] with its principal place of business [that's irrelevant] and headquarters [same] located in Savannah, Georgia." See para. 7. The complaint includes a similar allegation about Defendant Strength of Nature, LLC, and Defendant Beauty Bell Enterprises, LLC. Maybe there is, in fact, complete diversity. But based on the complaint, no one can tell. The Court grants Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint by March 17, 2023. In the meantime, the complaint is stricken. Emailed notice (cdh, ) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Neiman, David) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Quiana Perez; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AILNDC-20380106.(Neiman, David) |
| CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached #Consent To# form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (ak, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Steven C. Seeger. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Maria Valdez. Case assignment: Random assignment. (ak, ) |
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
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.
