SBL Enterprises LLC et al v. Keystone Capital Corporation et al

On 05/18/2021 SBL Enterprises LLC filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against Keystone Capital Corporation. This case was filed in U.S. District Courts, New York Southern District Court. The Judge overseeing this case is Mary Kay Vyskocil. The case status is Disposed - Other Disposed.

Case Details

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

Mary Kay Vyskocil

Party Details

Plaintiffs

SBL Enterprises LLC

Defendants

Keystone Capital Corporation

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

Michael Joseph Romano

Court Documents

Docket Entries

Docket (#13) ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND: Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to close the case. SO ORDERED (Signed by Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil on 7/1/2021) (rj) (Entered: 07/01/2021)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less

Docket (#12) FIRST LETTER addressed to Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil from Michael J. Romano dated July 1, 2021 re: Defendants' time to respond to the Complaint. Document filed by SBL Enterprises LLC, John Slater..(Romano, Michael) (Entered: 07/01/2021)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less

Docket (#11) WAIVER OF SERVICE RETURNED EXECUTED. Keystone Capital Corporation waiver sent on 6/25/2021, answer due 8/24/2021; Frank Nocito waiver sent on 6/25/2021, answer due 8/24/2021; Malcolm Taub waiver sent on 6/25/2021, answer due 8/24/2021. Document filed by SBL Enterprises LLC; John Slater..(Romano, Michael) (Entered: 06/28/2021)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less

Docket (#10) COMPLAINT against Keystone Capital Corporation, Frank Nocito, Malcolm Taub. Document filed by SBL Enterprises LLC, John Slater..(Romano, Michael) (Entered: 05/20/2021)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less

Docket (#9) ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITH LEAVE TO AMEND: Accordingly, Plaintiffs have failed to plead the citizenship of Defendant Keystone. Because the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the Complaint must be dismissed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) ("If the court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action."); Arbaugh, 546 U.S. at 514 ("[W]hen a federal court concludes that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the complaint in its entirety."); Banks-Gervais v. Bd. of Elections, No. 18-CV-5252 (RJD)(VMS), 2018 WL 10070504, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 28, 2018) ("When a court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, dismissal is mandatory." (citing Arbaugh, 546 U.S. at 514)). And because the Court raised the issue of subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte, the Complaint is dismissed without prejudice and with leave to amend to cure the jurisdictional defects described above. See, e.g., Minard v. Pareto Partners, No. 04 Civ. 741(CSH), 2005 WL 2206783, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 12, 2005) ("The Court having raised sua sponte the question discussed in this Memorandum, it is fair to allow plaintiff, if so advised, to attempt to demonstrate that the parties are completely diverse."). Plaintiffs shall file an Amended Complaint on or before June 19, 2021. Failure to file an Amended Complaint by that date will result in dismissal of all claims in this case without prejudice and without leave to amend. SO ORDERED. (Amended Pleadings due by 6/19/2021.) (Signed by Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil on 5/19/2021) (mml) (Entered: 05/19/2021)

[+] Read More [-] Read Less