United States District Court, M.D. Louisiana
NOTICE AND ORDER
WILDER-DOOMES, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
matter arises from a first-party property insurance claim
asserted by Mitali Express, LLC (“Mitali”)
against Canopius U.S. Insurance, Inc.
(“Canopius”) under a commercial property
insurance policy issued by Canopius for certain property
located at 1410 N. Range Avenue, Denham Springs, Louisiana
70726. The insurance claim is for the flood
damage that occurred on or about August 13, 2016, as well as
damage from an alleged burglary at the subject property
around the time of the flood. On or about August 14, 2017,
Mitali filed a Petition for Damages against Canopius in the
Twenty-First Judicial District Court for the Parish of
Livingston, State of Louisiana, seeking damages and
reimbursement for restoration and replacement of Mitali's
damaged property and all ancillary costs associated
therewith. The matter was removed to this Court by
Canopius on October 20, 2017, on the basis of diversity
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a).
Notice of Removal contains the following allegations
regarding the citizenship of the parties:
Plaintiff, Mitali Express, LLC, is a Limited Liability
Company, registered in the State of Louisiana with its
registered domicile address at 13033 Carrington Place Avenue,
Baton Rouge, LA 70817. (See Plaintiff's Petition, Exhibit
“A”)(See Louisiana Secretary of State Detailed
Record for Mitali Express, LLC, Exhibit “B”).
Defendant, Canopius U.S. Insurance, Inc., is a corporation
which is incorporated in the State of Delaware, with its
principal place of business located in the State of Illinois.
Thus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§ 1332(c)(1), Canopius U.S.
Insurance, Inc. is a citizen of the States of Delaware and
information regarding the citizenship of all parties is
necessary to establish the Court's diversity
jurisdiction, as well as to make the determination required
under 28 U.S.C. § 1441 regarding whether the case was
properly removed to this Court. Citizenship has not been
adequately alleged in the Notice of Removal. While the
citizenship of the defendant, Canopius U.S. Insurance, Inc.,
has been properly alleged,  the citizenship of the plaintiff,
Mitali Express, LLC, has not been adequately alleged. The
Fifth Circuit has held that for purposes of diversity, the
citizenship of a limited liability company is determined by
considering the citizenship of all its members. Harvey v.
Grey Wolf Drilling Co., 542 F.3d 1077, 1080 (5th Cir.
2008). Thus, to properly allege the citizenship of a limited
liability company, a party must identify each of the members
of the limited liability company and the citizenship of each
member in accordance with the requirements of 28 U.S.C.
§ 1332(a) and (c). The same requirement applies to any
member of a limited liability company which is also a limited
liability company. See, Turner Bros. Crane and Rigging,
LLC v. Kingboard Chemical Holding Ltd., Civ. A. No.
06-88-A, 2007 WL 2848154, at *4 (M.D. La. Sept. 24, 2007)
(“when partners or members are themselves entities or
associations, the citizenship must be traced through however
many layers of members or partners there may be, and failure
to do [so] can result in dismissal for want of
jurisdiction.”) (citations omitted).
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Canopius U.S.
Insurance, Inc. shall have seven (7) days from the date of
this Notice and Order to file a comprehensive amended Notice
of Removal without further leave of Court properly setting
forth the citizenship particulars required to establish that
the Court has diversity jurisdiction over this case under 28
U.S.C. § 1332(a).
 R. Doc. 1 at ¶ 2.
 R. Doc. 1-2.
 R. Doc. 1. Canopius asserts that
removal is timely under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(1) because
the state court Petition had not yet been served upon
Canopius at the time of removal. Id. at ¶ 4.
Alternatively, Canopius asserts that removal is timely under
28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(3) because Canopius recently learned
that the amount sought by Mitali exceeds $75, 000.
Specifically, Canopius asserts that it received a copy of the
Petition from Mitali's counsel by email on August 18,
2017, at which point Canopius believed that Mitali intended
to pursue a claim of approximately $27, 000 for alleged
burglary damages. However, on September 26, 2017,
Mitali's counsel sent email correspondence to counsel for