Xie

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4 PALM STREET CAPITAL LLC, et al., Case No. 22-cv-01932-NC 5 Plaintiffs, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE SUBJECT MATTER v. JURISDICTION

CAIXING XIE,

8 Defendant.

Minutes before starting jury selection for trial in this matter, counsel for defendant Caixing Xie suggested he would move for dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Xie’s counsel suggested Xie was a citizen of California for the purposes of diversity jurisdiction, which would destroy diversity in this matter. Later, Xie’s counsel indicated he had reviewed the relevant law and decided against bringing the motion. Still, the Court is concerned because “[s]ubject-matter jurisdiction can never be waived or forfeited.” Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 141 (2012). And 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 …