American Rock Salt Company LLC et al v. Keili Trading LLC et al
| American Rock Salt Company LLC and Vaporizer LLC |
| Menachem Levitin, Keili Trading LLC and Mendy Levitin |
| 6:2024cv06113 |
| February 16, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Western District of New York |
| Elizabeth A Wolford |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 28, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 JUDGMENT dismissing case without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Signed by Clerk of Court on 2/28/2024. (TF) |
| Filing 7 TEXT ORDER dismissing without prejudice #5 amended complaint. On February 16, 2024, Plaintiffs American Rock Salt Company LLC ("ARS") and Vaporizer LLC ("Vaporizer") (collectively, "Plaintiffs") filed a complaint against defendants Keili Trading LLC ("Keili") and Menachem Levitin, alleging breach of contract. The complaint alleged that the Court has jurisdiction over the matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332, i.e., diversity jurisdiction, because the Plaintiffs and Defendants are citizens of different states and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. (See Dkt. 1 at 1-2).Thereafter, on February 22, 2024, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause, directing Plaintiffs to show cause, through the filing of an amended complaint within 14 days of entry of the Order, as to why the action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (Dkt. 4). Specifically, the Court explained that the Plaintiffs, as well as defendant Keili, are LLCs, and "[w]ith the exception of corporations, the citizenship of business entities is derived from the citizenship of all members of the entity." (Dkt. 4 at 2 (quoting ICON MW, LLC v. Hofmeister, 950 F. Supp. 2d 544, 546 (S.D.N.Y. 2013)); see also Handelsman v. Bedford Vill. Assocs. Ltd. P'ship, 213 F.3d 48, 51-52 (2d Cir. 2000) (discussing that for purposes of diversity jurisdiction, limited liability companies and limited partnerships have the citizenship of their members). Because the complaint did not include allegations setting forth the citizenship of the LLCs, the Court could not make a determination as to whether Plaintiffs were completely diverse from Defendants. (See Dkt. 4 at 2-3).Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on February 26, 2024. (Dkt. 5). In the amended complaint, Plaintiffs included allegations setting forth the members of ARS, Vaporizer, and Keili. (Dkt. 5 at 2). With respect to ARS, Plaintiffs allege that it "is a sole member entity whose member is American Rock Salt Holdings, LLC, which entity is a New York limited liability company also located at 3846 Retsof Road, Retsof, New York 14539." (Id.). In other words, the sole member of plaintiff ARSAmerican Rock Salt Holdings, LLCis also an LLC. However, Plaintiffs neglected to plead the membership of American Rock Salt Holdings, LLC, despite the Court's previously informing them that limited liability companies have the citizenship of their members. Because American Rock Salt Holdings is also an LLC, Plaintiffs were required to identify the citizenship of its members. See, e.g., United States Liability Ins. Co. v. M Remodeling Corp., 444 F. Supp. 3d 408, 410 (E.D.N.Y. 2020) ("In pleading an LLC's citizenship, the identity and citizenship of each member has to be specifically alleged.... It follows from this that if any of an LLC's members are themselves non-corporate entities, then a plaintiff must allege the identity and citizenship of their members, proceeding up the chain of ownership until it has alleged the identity and citizenship of every individual and corporation with a direct or indirect interest in the LLC." (citations omitted)).As the Court previously explained, "it is well established that [t]he party seeking to invoke jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1332 bears the burden of demonstrating that the grounds for diversity exist and that diversity is complete." Herrick Co., Inc. v. SCS Commc'ns, Inc., 251 F.3d 315, 322-23 (2d Cir. 2001) (quotations and citation omitted). Plaintiffs have failed to properly invoke the Court's jurisdiction by providing the citizenship of each member of ARS, despite that this information plainly should be within their knowledge. Further, Plaintiffs were provided the opportunity to cure their error, but they failed to do so. For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs have failed to carry their burden of demonstrating complete diversity. Accordingly, this case is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Elizabeth A. Wolford on 02/27/2024. (CAL)Clerk to Follow up |
| Filing 6 Corporate Disclosure Statement by American Rock Salt Company LLC, Vaporizer LLC. (Bullard, H. Todd) |
| Filing 5 AMENDED COMPLAINT against American Rock Salt Company LLC, Vaporizer LLC, filed by American Rock Salt Company LLC, Vaporizer LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C)(Bullard, H. Todd) |
Filing 4
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Plaintiffs are directed to show cause, through the filing of an amended complaint within 14 days of entry of this Order, as to why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Signed by Hon. Elizabeth A. Wolford on 02/22/2024. (CAL)
|
| Filing 3 Corporate Disclosure Statement by American Rock Salt Company LLC, Vaporizer LLC identifying Corporate Parent American Rock Salt Company LLC for Vaporizer LLC.. (Bullard, H. Todd) |
| ATTENTION ALL PARTIES OR INTERVENORS: Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1 and/or General Order No. 157 In the Matter of Disclosure of Members, Shareholders, Partners, and Leaders of Business Organization Parties, all Disclosure Statements are to be filed with first appearance, pleading, petition, motion, response, or other request addressed to the court. (KM) |
| Filing 2 Summons Issued as to Keili Trading LLC, Menachem Levitin. (TMK) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Keili Trading LLC, Menachem Levitin $ 405 receipt number ANYWDC-5109427, filed by American Rock Salt Company LLC, Vaporizer LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit, #4 Civil Cover Sheet, #5 Summons-Keili Trading, #6 Summons - Levitin)(Bullard, H. Todd) |
| Case Assigned to Hon. Elizabeth A. Wolford. Notification to Chambers of on-line civil case opening. (TMK) |
| Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge: A United States Magistrate of this Court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636c and FRCP 73. The Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge form (AO-85) is available for download at #http://www.uscourts.gov/services-forms/forms. (TMK) |
| AUTOMATIC REFERRAL TO MEDIATION Pursuant to Section 2.1(A) of the Plan for Alternative Dispute Resolution in the United States District Court for the Western District of New York (the ADR Plan), this case is automatically referred to ADR. To access the ADR Plan and for inquiries regarding the Court's ADR Program please review the Court's #ADR webpage and/or contact the Court's ADR Administrator at #adrprogram@nywd.uscourts.gov.' Prior to the Local Rule 16 scheduling conference, counsel and unrepresented parties shall review the #ADR Plan and confer with each other regarding ADR for this case. Unless the parties agree to a different intervention, it is presumed they will participate in mediation. The parties shall be prepared to report on the outcome of their ADR discussion at the scheduling conference, as the initial Scheduling Order for this case will establish ADR deadlines in accordance with the ADR Plan. (TMK) |
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 New York Western 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.
