Case Information
*1 Case 4:25-cv-00055-AMA-PK Document 8 Filed 05/19/25 PageID.118 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH WENDY GRAHAM, ORDER TO FILE DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS REQUIRED BY Plaintiff, FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 7.1 v. Case No. 4:25-cv-00055 FARM BUREAU PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE CO., District Judge Ann Marie McIff Allen
Defendant. Magistrate Judge Paul Kohler
As courts of limited jurisdiction, federal district courts have a responsibility to ensure they
have subject-matter jurisdiction in every case. 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.”); see also, e.g. , Daigle v. Shell Oil Co. , 972 F.2d 1527, 1539 (10th Cir. 1992) (noting the Tenth Circuit’s “responsibility to ensure even sua sponte that [it] ha[s] subject matter jurisdiction before considering a case”). Accordingly, the Court ORDERS the parties to file statements disclosing all information required under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1 within 14 days of this order.
In addition to mandating certain other disclosures, Rule 7.1 helps the Court fulfill its duty to confirm subject-matter jurisdiction by requiring each party in diversity cases like this one to “name—and identify the citizenship of—every individual or entity whose citizenship is attributed to that party.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1(a)(2). Where, as here, the action has been removed from state court, the parties must indicate their respective citizenships as of the time of removal. Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a)(2)(A). In addition, because diversity of citizenship “is to be determined with reference to the facts as they existed at the time of filing,” the Court also directs the parties to disclose their respective citizenships as of the time when this case was filed in state court. Grynberg v. Kinder
*2 Case 4:25-cv-00055-AMA-PK Document 8 Filed 05/19/25 PageID.119 Page 2 of 2 Morgan Energy Partners, L.P. , 805 F.3d 901, 905 (10th Cir. 2015). To ensure complete and correct disclosures, the Court notes that domicile—not mere residency—is the touchstone for determining an individual’s citizenship for jurisdictional purposes. Siloam Springs Hotel, L.L.C. v. Century Sur. Co. , 781 F.3d 1233, 1238 (10th Cir. 2015).
DATED this 16th day of May 2025.
BY THE COURT:
_________________________ Ann Marie McIff Allen United States District Judge
2