Bank of Hope v. Pinky Nail, Incorporated et al
| Bank of Hope |
| Pinky Nail, Incorporated and Hye Kyung Shim |
| 1:2023cv04229 |
| June 30, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| John J Tharp |
| Contract: Negotiable Instrument |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Contract Default |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 21, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr:Plaintiff's motion for an entry of default #11 is granted. The clerk is directed to enter a default against defendants Pinky Nail, Inc. and Hye Kyung Shim. Mailed notice (air, ) |
| Filing 11 MOTION by Plaintiff Bank of Hope for entry of default (Attachments: #1 Notice of Filing)(Gipson, Brian) |
| Filing 10 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr: The parties are directed to review the procedures for initial status reports, located at [https://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/judge-info.aspx?79eF+7uiX7ewBj/ITKrjoA==] and to submit an initial status report by 08/29/2023. The report should include a proposed case management schedule reflecting any disputes between the parties as to the proposed schedule. Mailed notice (air, ) |
| Filing 9 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Bank of Hope as to Pinky Nail, Incorporated on 7/25/2023, answer due 8/15/2023. (Gipson, Brian) |
| Filing 8 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Bank of Hope as to Hye Kyung Shim on 7/23/2023, answer due 8/14/2023. (Gipson, Brian) |
| Filing 7 SECOND AMENDED complaint by Bank of Hope against All Defendants (Attachments: #1 Notice of Filing)(Gipson, Brian) |
| Filing 6 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr: The plaintiff has filed an amended complaint, explaining that it is a wholly-owned subsidiary of a corporation, Hope Bancorp, Inc. Dkt. 5 at 1 ("Plaintiff is a California-state chartered bank, and a wholly owned subsidiary of Hope Bancorp, Inc. ("HBI"). HBI is a corporation incorporated in the State of Delaware with its principal place of business in Los Angeles, California."). No further explanation about the plaintiff's corporate structure or business operations is given. This does not answer the question of the plaintiff's citizenship, because (1) it is still not clear what type of corporate entity the plaintiffas opposed to its parentis (are all state-chartered banks necessarily corporations?), and (2) the plaintiff still does not plead its own principal place of business. See Dkt. 3. The Court cannot assess the plaintiff's allegation of diverse citizenship based upon the pleading. The Court again grants the plaintiff leave to file a second amended complaint by 7/21/2023 which establishes the plaintiff's citizenship. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Mailed notice (air, ) |
| Filing 5 First AMENDED complaint by Bank of Hope against All Defendants (Attachments: #1 Notice of Filing)(Gipson, Brian) |
| Filing 4 NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Bank of Hope (Gipson, Brian) |
| SUMMONS Issued as to Defendants Pinky Nail, Incorporated, Hye Kyung Shim (emc, ) |
| Filing 3 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr: The plaintiff's complaint asserts jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332, alleging in part that the plaintiff "is a California-state chartered banking association, the main office of which is located within the state of California and organized under the laws of the State of California." Compl. 1. However, it is not clear from the caption of the complaint or the allegations whether the plaintiff is a corporation or a different type of corporate entity like an LLC or partnership. See Thomas v. Guardsmark, LLC, 487 F.3d 531, 534 (7th Cir. 2007) ("an LLC's jurisdictional statement must identify the citizenship of each of its members..."). Further, alleging the location of a corporation's "main office" or "headquarters" is not the same as alleging its principal place of business. Dalton v. Teva N. Am., 891 F.3d 687, 690 (7th Cir. 2018) ("what matters for the citizenship of a corporation is its state of incorporation and its principal place of business, not its 'headquarters.'"). Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint by 7/14/2023 which cures these defects and permits the Court to evaluate the allegations of citizenship. Failure to amend may result in the dismissal of this lawsuit. Plaintiff's attention is also directed to Local Rule 3.2, which requires the filing of a Notification of Affiliates with a party's first pleading. Mailed notice (air, ) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Gipson, Brian) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Bank of Hope; Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AILNDC-20792383.(Gipson, Brian) |
| 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. (jcc, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Sheila M. Finnegan. Case assignment: Random assignment. (jcc, ) |
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.
