Ruiz v. Singh et al
| Alberto Ruiz |
| Shamsher Singh and Knight Riders Trucklines LLC |
| 3:2026cv01855 |
| June 4, 2026 |
| U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
| Ed Kinkeade |
| Torts/Pers Inj: Motor Vehicle |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 22, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Clerk's Notice of Mailing certified copy of the docket sheet, #10 Order and Remand letter to the 14th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas. (ykp) (ykp). |
| Civil Case Terminated per #10 Order remanding this case to the 14th Judicial District Court. (ykp) |
Filing 10
ORDER: The Court is in receipt of Defendant Shamsher Singh's Amended Notice of Removal (the "Amended Notice") (Doc. No. 9). Having carefully reviewed the Amended Notice, the binding case law, and the relevant portions of the record, the Court concludes that Defendant Shamsher Singh, the party seeking the federal forum, has not satisfied his burden on removal of establishing the Court's subject matter jurisdiction over this civil matter. Without clearly established federal jurisdiction, the Court must and hereby does remand this case to the 14th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas. See 28 U.S.C. 1447(c). (Ordered by Judge Ed Kinkeade on 6/22/2026) (chmb) (Main Document 10 replaced on 6/30/2026) (chmb).
|
| Filing 9 AMENDED NOTICE OF REMOVAL filed by Shamsher Singh. Unless exempted, attorneys who are not admitted to practice in the Northern District of Texas must seek admission promptly. Forms and Instructions found at www.txnd.uscourts.gov, or by clicking here: # Attorney Information - Bar Membership. If admission requirements are not satisfied within 21 days, the clerk will notify the presiding judge.(Attachments: #1 Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Cover Sheet Supplement Supp. Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Exhibit(s) Certificate of Interested Persons, #4 Exhibit(s) State Court Docket Sheet, #5 Exhibit(s) Index and Copies of State Court Pleadings, #6 Exhibit(s) Texas Peace Officer's Crash Report, #7 Exhibit(s) Articles of Organization for KRT LLC, #8 Exhibit(s) Statement of Information for KRT LLC) (Ahmed, Farrah) Modified event text on 6/17/2026 (kxm). |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Attorney Contact Information filed by Shamsher Singh (Ahmed, Farrah) |
| Filing 7 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Alberto Ruiz. (Clerk QC note: No affiliate entered in ECF). (Guerrero, Rogelio) |
|
Filing 6
ELECTRONIC ORDER of Jurisdictional Deficiency. The Court has "an independent obligation to determine whether subject-matter jurisdiction exists, even in the absence of a challenge from any party." Arbaugh v. Y&H Corp., 546 U.S. 500, 514 (2006) (citing Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co., 526 U.S. 574, 583 (1999)). Defendant Shamsher Singh removed this case to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ¶ 1332(a). Doc. No. 1 at 2. For subject matter jurisdiction based on complete diversity, the party seeking the federal forum must establish that each plaintiff has citizenship different from that of each defendant. See 28 U.S.C. ¶ 1332(a)(1); Corfield v. Dallas Glen Hills LP, 355 F.3d 853, 857 (5th Cir. 2003). "When jurisdiction depends on citizenship, citizenship must be 'distinctly and affirmatively alleged.'" Getty Oil Corp., a Div. of Texaco v. Ins. Co. of N. Am., 841 F.2d 1254, 1259 (5th Cir. 1988). Defendant Singh fails to properly allege the citizenship of Plaintiff and wholly fails to allege the citizenship of named Defendant Knight Riders Trucklines LLC. Therefore, on this removal record, the Court cannot exercise subject matter jurisdiction over this matter.Defendant Singh clearly understands that the citizenship of a natural person "is determined by domicile, which requires residency plus an intent to make the place of residency one's permanent home." SXSW, L.L.C. v. Fed. Ins. Co., 83 F.4th 405, 407 (5th Cir. 2023) (emphasis added) (citing Gilbert v. David, 235 U.S. 561, 568-69 (1915)); see Doc. No. 1 at 2 (stating this standard) (citing Mas v. Perry, 489 F.2d 1396, 1399 (5th Cir. 1974)). However Defendant Singh then goes on to allege that "Plaintiff Alberto Ruiz alleges in Plaintiff's Original Petition that he resides in Dallas County, Texas. Plaintiff is therefore a citizen of Texas." Doc. No. 1 at 2. Defendant Singh submits no other allegations or evidence to establish Plaintiff's citizenship. The Fifth Circuit has consistently reaffirmed that "[a]n allegation of residency alone 'does not satisfy the requirement of an allegation of citizenship.'" SXSW, L.L.C. v. Fed. Ins. Co., 83 F.4th 405, 407 (5th Cir. 2023) (quoting Strain v. Harrelson Rubber Co., 742 F.2d 888, 889 (5th Cir. 1984)); see, e.g., MidCap Media Fin., L.L.C. v. Pathway Data, Inc., 929 F.3d 310, 313 (5th Cir. 2019); Neely v. Bankers Tr. Co. of Tex., 757 F.2d 621, 634 n.18 (5th Cir. 1985); Stine v. Moore, 213 F.2d 446, 448 (5th Cir. 1954). Under this well-established caselaw, it follows that "the mere fact that Plaintiff['s] pleadings identify [him] as a Texas resident doesn't guarantee that [he's] a Texas citizen." Villamil v. Fayrustin, 730 F. Supp. 3d 328, 334 (W.D. Tex. 2024). Thus, Defendant Singh incorrectly relies on Plaintiff's allegation in the state court petition that he resides in Texas as sufficiently demonstrating Plaintiff's citizenship for diversity purposes. In addition to the deficient allegation of Plaintiff's citizenship, Defendant Singh wholly fails to allege the citizenship of named Defendant Knight Riders Trucklines LLC ("KRT LLC"). Plaintiff named two defendants in this lawsuit, Singh and KRT LLC. See Doc. No. 1-5 at 4. Before this case was removed to federal court, state court citation was issued as to KRT LLC and an executed return of service was filed in state court. See id. at 9, 13. In his Notice of Removal, Defendant Singh does not address or allege KRT LLC's citizenship. Instead, Defendant Singh claims that, based on his "counsel's investigations," KRT LLC "is not the correct legal entity associated with the incident" giving rise to this suit. Doc. No. 1 at 3. Defendant Singh then identifies Knight Riders Trucklines Corporation ("KRT Corporation") as the "correct entity" and alleges KRT Corporation is a citizen of California. Id. Defendant Singh asserts that complete diversity exists between Plaintiff and himself, "the only properly named and served defendant in this matter." Id. Whether Defendant Singh or his counsel believes that KRT Corporation is the proper party or "the intended entity" to be sued is of no moment here. See id. "A plaintiff is the master of his complaint[.]" Elam v. Kansas City S. Ry. Co., 635 F.3d 796, 803 (5th Cir. 2011). "This includes a plaintiffs decision as to which parties to sue." De Jongh v. State Farm Lloyds, 55 F. Appx 435, 438 (5th Cir. 2014) (citing Lincoln Prop. Co. v. Roche, 546 U.S. 81, 91 (2005)). The record clearly reflects that Plaintiff filed suit against KRT LLC, not KRT Corporation, and that KRT LLC was served with state court citation on February 19, 2026. Doc. No. 1-5 at 4, 13. The removal record does not reflect that, prior to removal, KRT LLC was dismissed from this suit or that KRT Corporation intervened or was otherwise substituted as the (alleged) proper party in interest for named Defendant KRT LLC. See also Salazar v. Allstate Tex. Lloyds, Inc., 455 F.3d 571, 575 (5th Cir. 2006) ("[W]here an entity has not properly been made a party in state court, removal jurisdiction cannot be premised on its presence in the action.") (citing Housing Auth. v. Millwood, 472 F.2d 268, 272 (5th Cir. 1973)). This Court has no authority to disregard Plaintiff's choice to sue KRT LLC rather than KRT Corporation. See also Grupo Dataflux v. Atlas Global Grp., L.P., 541 U.S. 567, 570 (2004) ("It has long been the case that the jurisdiction of the court depends upon the state of things at the time of the action brought.") (citation modified). Defendant Singh did not meet his burden to establish federal jurisdiction because he did not properly allege Plaintiff's citizenship and he wholly omitted citizenship allegations for KRT LLC. See Manguno v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 276 F.3d 720, 723 (5th Cir. 2002). The Court cannot exercise diversity jurisdiction over this matter on this record. However, prior to remanding for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, Defendant Singh may amend his Notice of Removal in accordance with this Order by June 15, 2026. If Defendant Singh fails to amend or fails to do so sufficiently, the Court will remand this case without further notice. See 28 U.S.C. 1447(c); Gasch v. Hartford Accident & Indem. Co., 491 F.3d 278, 281-82 (5th Cir. 2007) ("The removal statute is therefore to be strictly construed, and any doubt about the propriety of removal must be resolved in favor of remand."). (Ordered by Judge Ed Kinkeade on 6/8/2026) (chmb)
|
| Filing 5 New Case Notes: A filing fee has been paid. Pursuant to Misc. Order 6, Plaintiff is provided the Notice of Right to Consent to Proceed Before A U.S. Magistrate Judge (Judge Rutherford). Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. (kxm) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER: This Order governs requests to file materials in this case under seal. (Ordered by Judge Ed Kinkeade on 6/4/2026) (chmb)
|
|
Filing 3
ELECTRONIC STANDING ORDER: This Court requires all counsel of record to review and comply with the undersigned's Judge Specific Requirements as well as the Local Civil Rules for the Northern District of Texas upon making an appearance in a matter before this Court. These can be found at # Judge Specific Requirements and # Local Civil Rules . Further, counsel shall refer to this Court's Judge Specific Requirements and the Local Civil Rules prior to calling chambers with any questions. The Court calls specific attention to Local Civil Rule 7.2(f), which addresses the disclosure of the use of generative artificial intelligence, and Local Civil Rule 83.10, which address the requirement of local counsel. (Ordered by Judge Ed Kinkeade on 6/4/2026) (chmb)
|
| Filing 2 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Shamsher Singh. (Clerk QC note: Affiliate entry indicated). (Ahmed, Farrah) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL filed by Shamsher Singh. (Filing fee $405; receipt number ATXNDC-16507398) In each Notice of Electronic Filing, the judge assignment is indicated, and a link to the # Judges Copy Requirements and # Judge Specific Requirements is provided. The court reminds the filer that any required copy of this and future documents must be delivered to the judge, in the manner prescribed, within three business days of filing. Unless exempted, attorneys who are not admitted to practice in the Northern District of Texas must seek admission promptly. Forms and Instructions found at www.txnd.uscourts.gov, or by clicking here: # Attorney Information - Bar Membership. If admission requirements are not satisfied within 21 days, the clerk will notify the presiding judge. (Attachments: #1 Cover Sheet, #2 Cover Sheet Supplement, #3 Exhibit(s) Certificate of Interested Persons, #4 Exhibit(s) State Court Docket Sheet, #5 Exhibit(s) Index and Copies of State Court Pleadings) (Ahmed, Farrah) (Attachment 1,2 and 3 flattened on 6/5/2026) (kxm). |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Texas 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.
