Playco Global, Inc. v. Reisel ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 PLAYCO GLOBAL, INC., Case No. 21-cv-00492-NC 11 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 12 WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE v. DISMISSED FOR LACK OF 13 SUBJECT MATTER EITAN REISEL, et al., JURISDICTION 14 Defendants. Re: Dkt. No. 11 15 16 17 Plaintiff Playco Global, Inc. filed an amended complaint against Defendants Eitan 18 Reisel and VGames, L.P. on February 8, 2021. Dkt. No. 11. In the amended complaint, 19 Playco alleges that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction based on diversity pursuant to 20 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(2). Id. ¶ 10. In reaching this conclusion, however, Playco incorrectly 21 applies the corporation citizenship test to VGames, L.P., a limited partnership. Id. ¶ 8. “In 22 cases where entities rather than individuals are litigants, diversity jurisdiction depends on 23 the form of the entity.” Johnson v. Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d 894, 899 24 (9th Cir. 2006). Non-corporate entities, like limited partnerships, are treated differently for 25 purposes of diversity jurisdiction. See id. As such, Playco should have listed the 26 citizenship of each of VGames’ members to evaluate diversity of citizenship. See 15A 27 Moore’s Federal Practice – Civil § 102.57 (2020); see also Carden v. Arkoma Assocs., 494 1 Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Playco to show cause in writing why this case 2 || should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction by March 3, 2021. 3 || VGames has not yet appeared in the case, but they may file an optional reply by March 8, 4 || 2021. 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 7 Dated: February 25, 2021 hbo ——> _ NATHANAEL M. COUSINS 8 United States Magistrate Judge 9 10 11 12 13 (14 15 16 © 17 1g zZ 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28