UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Cornerstone Consulting Organization, LLC, Case No. 3:25-cv-931

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER

Exro Technologies, Inc.,

Defendant.

On May 8, 2025, Cornerstone Consulting Organization, LLC invoked this Court’s jurisdiction when filing this action. (Doc. No. 1). For a district court to have original diversity jurisdiction over a case, complete diversity must exist between the parties to the dispute.

(a). To satisfy the diversity jurisdiction requirements, the dispute must be between citizens of different states.

(a)(1). “[A] limited liability company has the citizenship of each of its members.” Delay v. Rosenthal Collins Grp., LLC,

(6th Cir. 2009). Accordingly, “[w]hen diversity jurisdiction is invoked in a case in which a limited liability company is a party, the court needs to know the citizenship of each member of the company. And because a member of a limited liability company may itself have multiple members—and thus may itself have multiple citizenships—the federal court needs to know the citizenship of each ‘sub-member’ as well.”

Plaintiff states, “[i]ts members reside in Florida and Texas.” (Doc. No. 1 at 1). But because Plaintiff does not state its members, I cannot be assured that residency alone is sufficient to establish Plaintiff’s citizenship. To maintain this case in federal court, Plaintiff must supplement the Complaint by filing an affidavit of jurisdiction on or before July 25, 2025. This affidavit must identify each of its members and sub-members, which “must be traced through however many layers of partners or members there may be.” Meyerson v. Harrah’s E. Chicago Casino,

(7th Cir. 2002). For each member and sub-member, Plaintiff must state jurisdictional allegations sufficient for me to determine the citizenship of that member (e.g., the domicile of individuals, the place of

incorporation and principal place of business of corporations).

So Ordered.

s/ Jeffrey J. Helmick United States District Judge