Lloyd's

I. INTRODUCTION

21 Pending before the Court is Defendants Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London, 22 Syndicates 2623 and 623 (“Defendants”) motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter 23 jurisdiction. (“Mot.”, ECF No. 7). Plaintiff Viasat Inc. (“Plaintiff”) filed an opposition to 24 the motion, (“Opp’n”, ECF No. 11), and Defendants filed a reply, (“Reply”, ECF No. 15).1 25 26 27 Plaintiff filed an ex parte application for leave to file sur-reply. (ECF No. 30). 28 After a careful review of the facts presented and for the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss. II. BACKGROUND Plaintiff, a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Carlsbad, California, globally provides high-speed broadband satellite internet services. (“Compl.”, ECF No. 1 ¶¶ 6, 14). Lloyd’s of London “is comprised of various syndicate and company underwriters who share liability as subscribers to insurance policies[.]” (Id. at ¶ 7). Syndicate 2623 and Syndicate 6232 are two insurance syndicates at Lloyd’s, London, based in the United Kingdom. (Id. at ¶ 10). Plaintiff purchased…