United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Augusta Division
J. RANDAL HALL, District Judge.
This cause comes before the Court on its own initiative. Defendant Danaher Corporation removed this action from the Superior Court of Columbia County pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. As instructed by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, "[flederal courts are obligated to inquire into subject-matter jurisdiction sua sponte whenever it may be lacking." Cadet v. Bulger, 377 F.3d 1173, 1179 (11th Cir. 2004) (internal quotation marks omitted). Upon review of the record, the Court cannot discern whether the amount in controversy in this case exceeds the jurisdictional requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
Accordingly, Defendant Danaher Corporation is ORDERED to provide sufficient evidence by 5:00 p.m. on January 21, 2015 that the jurisdictional amount is in controversy. Defendant may rely on "judicial admissions , non-sworn letters submitted to the court, or other summary judgment type evidence that may reveal that the amount in controversy requirement is satisfied." Pretka v. Kolter City Plaza II, Inc., 608 F.3d 744, 754 (11th Cir. 2010). Other appropriate forms of evidence include, but are not limited to, affidavits, declarations, depositions, interrogatories, contracts, medical ...