Prakash Patel v. Bharat Patel

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaApril 17, 20202:20-cv-03510California231 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

facts surrounding defendant’s own citizenship. See, e.g., Leon v. Gordon Trucking, Inc., 76 F. Supp. 3d 1055, 1063 (C.D. Cal. 2014); Cretian v. Job1USA, Inc., No. 09-CV-770-ST, 2009 WL 4841039, at *1 (D. Or. Dec. 11, 2009) (“Defendant is presumed to know its own citizenship; indeed it is in the best position to know it for purposes of removal.”). Defendants’ allegations of their residence are therefore insufficient to establish this Court’s diversity jurisdiction. See Kanter, 265 F.3d at 857 (“Absent unusual circumstances, a party seeking to invoke diversity jurisdiction should be able to allege affirmatively the actual citizenship of the relevant parties.’’); Lindley Contours, LLC v. AABB Fitness Holdings, Inc., 414 F. App’x 62, 64 (9th Cir. 2011) (holding that an allegation that no member of a defendant LP “is an Oregon citizen,” without identifying the actual state of citizenship of the LP’s members or whether the members were composed of another layer of business entities, was insufficient to establish complete diversity). By failing to adequately allege their own citizenship, the Court cannot determine whether complete diversity of citizenship exists. Therefore,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.