United States District Court, D. Idaho
MEMORANDUM DECISION RE JURISDICTION AND CASE
MANAGEMENT ORDER TRACK: (STANDARD)
LYNN WINMILL CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE.
4, 2018, the Court conducted a scheduling conference in this
case. During the conference, the Court questioned whether
plaintiff had adequately alleged jurisdiction, as there did
not appear to be a federal claim, and plaintiff had not
alleged sufficient facts for the Court to determine if
diversity jurisdiction existed. Plaintiff agreed to file an
amended complaint to address these concerns. Plaintiff filed
his amended complaint on June 18, 2018. For the reasons
explained below, the Court has determined that it has
jurisdiction of this case and will therefore enter a Case
amended complaint alleges that the Court has diversity
jurisdiction over this matter under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
See Amended Compl., Dkt. 18, ¶ 5. But the
plaintiff still has not alleged sufficient facts to establish
diversity jurisdiction. The problems are:
(1) Plaintiff has sued Americold Realty Trust, which is
identified as “an Oregon corporation.” See
Id. ¶ 2. Plaintiff does not allege where Americold
Realty Trust has its principal place of business. For
diversity purposes, a corporation may have dual citizenship:
“A corporation shall be deemed to be a citizen of every
state and foreign state by which it has been incorporated
and the State or foreign state where it has its
principal place of business. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1)
(emphasis added). Thus, plaintiff should have alleged where
Americold Realty Trust's principal place of business is.
(2) The next problem relates to the second named defendant,
“Americold Logistics, LLC.” Plaintiff alleges
that this defendant is a “Delaware limited liability
company organized under the laws of the State of Delaware and
authorized to transact business in the State of Idaho.”
Am. Compl., Dkt. 18 at 3. Plaintiff has not alleged
the citizenship of the members of this entity. Courts treat
limited liability companies the same as partnerships for
diversity jurisdiction purposes, and therefore look to the
citizenship of each member of the company. See Johnson v.
Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th
Cir. 2006); see generally O'Connell &
Stevenson, Rutter Group Prac. Guide: Federal Civil
Procedure Before Trial ¶ 2:1372 (2017).
these deficiencies, the Court cannot determine if diversity
jurisdiction exists, so it will decline to accept
jurisdiction on that basis. See generally Americold
Realty Trust v. Conagra Foods, 136 S.Ct. 1012 (2016)
(because no record of plaintiff Americold Realty Trust's
shareholder's citizenship existed, diversity jurisdiction
was not established). The Court notes, however, that the
amended complaint alleges a new federal claim:
“Discrimination in Violation of Title I of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.” See Am.
Compl., Dkt. 18, at 4-5. Perplexingly, however, in his
“Jurisdiction and Venue” allegations, the
plaintiff does not allege that he is seeking to invoke
federal-question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331; he
cites only to the diversity jurisdiction statute - 28 U.S.C.
these circumstances, the Court will accept jurisdiction of
the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. The Court has
federal-question jurisdiction of the ADA claim, and it will
accept supplemental jurisdiction of the remaining claims.
See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a). The parties should be
aware, however, that if the Court dismisses the ADA claim, it
has discretion to decline to continue to exercise
supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law
claims, given that plaintiff has not established diversity
jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c).
satisfied itself that jurisdiction exists, the Court will
enter a Case Management Order. Accordingly, IT IS
ORDERED that the following recitation of deadlines
and procedures will govern this litigation:
Dispositive Motion Deadline: All dispositive
motions, including motions for punitive damages, must be
filed by April 26, 2019.
Amendment of Pleadings and Joinder of Parties:
Motions to amend pleadings and join parties, except for
allegations of punitive damages, must be filed on or before
October 4, 2018. This deadline will only be
extended for good cause shown.
Alternative Dispute Resolution: ADR must be held by
March 29, 2019. The parties are directed to
contact Wendy Messuri at ...