UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK JOSEPH LEE, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, Case No. 1:25-cv-04393 (JLR) -against- ORDER THURSDAY BOOT COMPANY, Defendant.

JENNIFER L. ROCHON, United States District Judge: Plaintiff Joseph Lee brings this action against Defendant Thursday Boot Company, invoking the Court’s subject matter jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005. See

(d). Plaintiff alleges that he is a citizen of New Jersey. See Dkt. 1 (“Compl.”) ¶ 7. He alleges that Defendant Thursday Boot Company is headquartered in New York. See

. He does not allege whether Defendant Thursday Boot Company is a corporation, limited liability company (“LLC”), or another form of corporate entity. It is well established that a corporation, for diversity purposes, “is considered a citizen of the state in which it is incorporated and the state of its principal place of business.” Bayerische Landesbank v. Aladdin Cap. Mgmt. LLC,

(2d Cir. 2012) (first citing

(c)(1); and then citing Universal Licensing Corp. v. Paola del Lungo S.p.A.,

(2d Cir. 2002)); accord N47 Assocs. LLC v. Alba Servs. Inc., No. 21-cv-03490 (MKV),

, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. May 19, 2021). An LLC, by contrast, “takes the citizenship of each of its members.” Bayerische Landesbank,

-52 (citing Handeslman v. Bedford Vill. Assocs. Ltd. P’ship,

, 51-52 (2d Cir. 2000)). Plaintiff has not properly established even minimal diversity for this Court’s jurisdiction under CAFA. Specifically, Plaintiff has not pleaded sufficient information to permit the Court to determine Defendant’s citizenship because he has failed to allege whether Defendant is a corporation, LLC, or some other form of corporate entity. Moreover, even if Defendant is a corporation, the allegations do not establish Defendant’s citizenship because Plaintiff has not pleaded where Defendant Thursday Boot Company is incorporated. See SBL Enters v. Keystone Cap. Corp., No. 21-cv-04459 (MKV),

, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. May 19, 2021) (plaintiff failed to plead corporation’s citizenship where plaintiff did not specify defendant corporation’s state of incorporation); Mazzeo v. Am. States Ins. Co., No. 14-cv-00361,

, at *3 (D. Conn. Mar. 21, 2014) (noting that “if Defendant is a corporation, Plaintiff must state with specificity any state in which Defendant is incorporated as well as the State in which it has its principal place of business”); He/msley-Spear, Inc. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., No. 89-cv-02498 (SWK),

, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. July 23, 1990) (plaintiffs did not adequately plead subject matter jurisdiction with regard to corporate defendant where they “failfed] to provide th[e cJourt with information regarding the place of incorporation of [the corporate defendant]”). Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that, on or before June 4, 2025, the Plaintiff shall amend his Complaint to properly allege the citizenship of the Defendant. If, by that date, the Plaintiff is unable to amend the Complaint to truthfully allege Defendant’s citizenship, then the Complaint will be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction without further notice to either party. Dated: May 28, 2025 New York, New York SO ORDERED.

United States District Judge