Ride the Ducks International, LLC v. T.H.E. Insurance Company

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 5 AT SEATTLE RIDE THE DUCKS INTERNATIONAL, LLC, Plaintiff, C15-1982 TSZ (consolidated with C15-1987 TSZ) v. MINUTE ORDER T.H.E. INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

12 The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable Thomas S. Zilly, United States District Judge: (1) The parties are DIRECTED to file, on or before September 12, 2022, a Joint Status Report addressing the following issues: (a) Whether the asserted basis for subject-matter jurisdiction in these 15 consolidated cases is diversity or a federal question. In Case No. C15-1982, the CM/ECF filer selected federal question jurisdiction based on 12 U.S.C. § 635, 16 which does not appear applicable to the facts of this case, and checked federal question as the basis of jurisdiction on the Civil Cover Sheet (C15-1982, docket 17 no. 1-1), but the Complaint (C15-1982, docket no. 1) pleads claims under state law and refers to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. In Case No. C15-1987, the CM/ECF filer selected 18 federal question jurisdiction related to an insurance contract, but checked diversity on the Civil Cover Sheet (C15-1987, docket no. 8), which seems consistent with 19 the fifteen “counts” set forth in the Complaint (C15-1987, docket no. 1) as to which T.H.E. Insurance Company seeks declaratory judgment pursuant to 28 20 U.S.C. § 2201, which does not confer jurisdiction. See Skelly Oil Co. v. Phillips Petroleum Co., 339 U.S. 667, 671 (1950). (b) If subject-matter jurisdiction is premised on diversity, whether this 22 matter should be dismissed without prejudice for failure to provide information 1 sufficient to determine the citizenship of one of the parties.1 Limited liability companies are citizens of every state in which their members are domiciled. See 2 Johnson v. Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006).

In Case No. C15-1982, the operative pleading indicates that Ride the Ducks 3 International, LLC (“RTDI”) is a Missouri limited liability company (“LLC”) with its principal place of business in Missouri and its headquarters in Georgia, see 4 Compl. (C15-1982, docket no. 1), and RTDI’s corporate disclosure statement merely “certifies that it is a Missouri corporation,” Corp. Discl. Stmt. (C15-1982, 5 docket no. 3). In Case No. C15-1987, the complaint alleges on “information and belief” that RTDI is a Missouri LLC with its principal place of business in Georgia 6 (not Missouri), and that its members are Herschend Family Entertainment Corporation, a Missouri corporation with its principal place of business in 7 Georgia, and Christopher Herschend, a resident of Georgia. Compl. (C15-1987, docket no. 1). RTDI has not admitted (and is therefore deemed to have denied) 8 the allegation concerning the identity of its members. See Answer (C15-1987, docket no. 35); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(b)(4). Because the documents filed so 9 far in these matters do not identify all members of RTDI or their respective citizenships, the Court cannot determine whether diversity jurisdiction exists. (2) The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Minute Order to all counsel of record.

Dated this 15th day of August, 2022.

Ravi Subramanian Clerk s/Gail Glass Deputy Clerk The opposing party, T.H.E. Insurance Company, is reported to be a Louisiana corporation with its principal place of business in Florida. See Compl. (C15-1987, docket no. 1); see also Corp. Discl. Stmt. (C15-1987, docket no. 12).