UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

VISION ONE ENTERPRISE, LLC, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 4:24 CV 1167 CDP ) WALL STREET SWEEPERS, LLC, ) et al., ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This newly filed case is before me for review of subject-matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff Vision One Enterprises, LLC (VOE), brings this action alleging that defendants Wall Street Sweepers, LLC (WSS), and Joshua A. Eldridge breached a services contract, wrongfully retained and assumed ownership of a $270,000 deposit paid by VOE that was to be refunded to VOE under terms of the contract, and engaged in fraudulent or negligent conduct to induce VOE to pay the $270,000 deposit despite defendants having no intention to perform on the contract. VOE invokes this Court’s diversity jurisdiction under

. I have reviewed VOE’s complaint and find that there is no adequate statement of citizenship with respect to any of the parties in this case. I will therefore order VOE to file an amended complaint to properly allege this Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. VOE asserts that it is a limited liability company whose sole member, Julia Woodley, “is an individual residing in the State of Missouri.” (ECF 1, Compl. at ¶

1.) For diversity purposes, an LLC’s citizenship is the citizenship of all its members. GMAC Com. Credit LLC v. Dillard Dep’t Stores, Inc.,

(8th Cir. 2004). A statement of an individual’s “residency,” however, is

insufficient to establish that person’s citizenship. Sanders v. Clemco Indus.,

(8th Cir. 1987). Because VOE’s statement of where its individual member resides is insufficient to establish that member’s citizenship, it has failed to establish its own citizenship as an LLC.

Defendant WSS is likewise an LLC, but VOE neither identifies the members of that LLC nor alleges the citizenship of any members. Finally, VOE asserts that defendant Eldridge is “an individual residing in the

State of Texas[.]” As stated above, a statement of residency does not establish an individual’s citizenship for purposes of diversity jurisdiction. Sanders,

. Because there is no sufficient statement of citizenship with respect to any

party in this case, I am unable to determine if this Court has subject-matter jurisdiction. Accordingly, I will give VOE seven (7) days to amend its complaint to properly allege this Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. Failure to timely comply

with this Order may result in this action being dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Therefore, IS IT HEREBY ORDERED that within seven (7) days of the date of this Order, plaintiff Vision One Enterprise, LLC, shall file an amended complaint that properly alleges this Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. Failure to timely comply with this Order may result in this action being dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

CATHERINE D.PERRY / UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated this 30th day of August, 2024.

_3-