Opinion

____________________________________________________________________________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. 2:25-cv-10949-JLS-MBK Date: December 05, 2025

Title: Samantha Cruz v. AI California LLC et al

Present: Honorable JOSEPHINE L. STATON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Kelly Davis N/A

Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANT:

Not Present Not Present

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY

THIS ACTION SHOULD NOT BE REMANDED TO

STATE COURT

On July 17, 2025, Plaintiff filed the instant action in California Superior Court.

(See Ex. 1 to Browning Decl., Compl., Doc. 4.) On November 14, 2025, Defendant

removed the case to this Court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction, asserting that the

parties are diverse and that the allegations in the Complaint place the amount in

controversy in excess of $75,000. (NOR ¶ 8, Doc. 1.)

Defendant’s assertions of citizenship, however, are insufficient to establish

diversity jurisdiction. Defendant states that it is a “limited liability company existing

under the laws of the State of Delaware,” with its principal place of business in Illinois.

(Jay Decl. ¶¶ 6–7, Doc. 3.) However, “an LLC is a citizen of every state of which its

owners/members are citizens.” Johnson v. Columbia Props. Anchorage, LP, 437 F.3d

894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006); see also Breckenridge v. Best Buy Co., 2010 WL 5315812, at *1

(C.D. Cal. Dec. 17, 2010) (explaining why the defendant’s reliance on Davis v. HSBC

Bank Nev., N.A., 557 F.3d 1026 (9th Cir. 2009) was inappropriate). Defendant does not

provide information as to its owners or members, so the Court cannot determine

Defendant’s citizenship.

____________________________________________________________________________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. 2:25-cv-10949-JLS-MBK Date: December 05, 2025

Title: Samantha Cruz v. AI California LLC et al

Accordingly, Defendant is ORDERED to show cause, in writing, no later than five

(5) days from the date of this Order, why this action should not be remanded for want of

federal jurisdiction. Failure to timely or adequately respond will result in this action

being remanded to state court.

Initials of preparer: kd