Free Order Dismissing Case - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:07-cv-00118-GMS

Document 16

Filed 07/23/2007

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

DANIEL SIEGFRIED, Plaintiff, v.

McNEIL CONSUMER HEALTHCARE, et al., Defendants.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Civil Action No. 07-118 GMS

ORDER On February 26, 2007, the plaintiff, Daniel Siegfried ("Siegfried") filed the above-captioned negligence and personal injury action against McNeil Consumer & Specialty Pharmaceuticals ("McNeil"), Johnson & Johnson-Merck Consumer Pharmaceuticals Co. ("J&J-Merck"), Johnson & Johnson ("J&J"), SFGT, Inc. ("SFGT"), Millsport L.L.C. ("Millsport"), and Andrew McVey ("McVey"). Presently before the court is the court's sua sponte inquiry regarding subject matter jurisdiction. See Golden ex. rel. Golden v. Golden, 382 F.3d 348, 354 (3d Cir. 2004); see also Nesbit v. Gears Unlimited, Inc., 347 F.3d 72, 76-77 (3d Cir. 2003) ("courts have an independent obligation to satisfy themselves of jurisdiction if it is in doubt . . . . A necessary corollary is that the court can raise sua sponte subject-matter jurisdiction concerns."). Because Siegfried asserts diversity as the only basis for jurisdiction, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, and because there is not complete diversity of citizenship, the court will dismiss this action. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1), a federal court has jurisdiction over a case in which there is complete diversity of citizenship. The term "complete diversity of citizenship" means that "no plaintiff can be a citizen of the same state as any of the defendants." Grand Union Supermarkets

Case 1:07-cv-00118-GMS

Document 16

Filed 07/23/2007

Page 2 of 2

of the V.I., Inc. v. H.E. Lockhart Mgmt., Inc., 316 F.3d 408, 410 (3d Cir. 2003). Where a corporation is a named party to the litigation, it is "deemed to be a citizen of any State by which it has been incorporated and of the State where it has its principal place of business . . . ." 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1) (emphasis added). Here, Siegfried's complaint alleges that he is a resident of

Pennsylvania. (D.I. 1 ¶ 1.) The complaint further alleges that at least two of the defendant corporations, McNeil and SFGT, have their principal place of business in Pennsylvania. (See D.I. 1 ¶ 2.) McNeil and SFGT, therefore, are citizens of Pennsylvania, the same state in which Siegfried resides. As a result, no complete diversity of citizenship exists, and the court will dismiss this case.

Dated: July 23, 2007

/s/ Gregory M. Sleet UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2