Kolar
Kolar v. Angiodynamics, Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
MICHAEL KOLAR,
Plaintiff,
v. Case No.: 2:24-cv-1000-SPC-NPM
ANGIODYNAMICS, INC. and
NAVILYST MEDICAL, INC.,
Defendants. /
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court after review of the docket. Plaintiff Michael Kolar brings this product liability action against Defendants Angiodynamics, Inc. and Navilyst Medical, Inc. (Doc. 1). Because Plaintiff fails to properly allege jurisdiction the Court dismisses his complaint without prejudice. The Court is “obligated to inquire into subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte whenever it may be lacking.” Univ. of S. Ala. v. Am. Tobacco Co., 168 F.3d 405, 410 (11th Cir. 1999). Plaintiff invokes the Court’s diversity jurisdiction. (Doc. 1 ¶ 6). The Court has diversity jurisdiction over a civil action where there is complete diversity of citizenship between the parties and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). The Defendants’ citizenship is at issue here. Both Defendants are corporations. A corporation is a citizen of both where it…