Club Car Wash Operating, LLC v. Hebert

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
CENTRAL DIVISION
CLUB CAR WASH OPERATING, LLC, 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	)
)
v. 	) 	Case No.: 2:26-cv-04042-MDH
)
BRETT HEBERT, 	)
)
Defendant. 	)
ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff Club Car Wash Operating, LLC’s Motion for Stay. (Doc. 13).
Defendant has filed his response, (Doc. 17), and Plaintiff has filed a reply (Doc. 19). The motion
is now ripe for adjudication on the merits.
Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges three counts against Defendant: Count I - Action for
Injunctive Relief; Count II - Breach of Contract; and Count III - Misappropriation of Trade Secrets.
(Doc. 1-2). Plaintiff brings its current motion asking for a stay of proceedings in this case until the
Court rules on Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand. (Doc. 11). Defendant states that he does not oppose
a stay if Plaintiff complies with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1(a)(2) regarding Plaintiff’s
mandate to comply with disclosure obligations. Specifically, Defendant argues that Plaintiff, as a
limited liability company, is required to file a disclosure statement identifying each member of the
LLC and the citizenship of each member. Defendant states that this information is essential for the
Court to determine its jurisdiction.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1 governs disclosure statements in federal court. It states
in relevant part:
In an action in which jurisdiction is based on diversity under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a),
a party or intervenor must, unless the court orders otherwise, file a disclosure
Case 2:26-cv-04042-MDH Document 24 Filed 03/17/26 Page 1 of 2

2
statement. 	The 	statement 	must 	name–and 	identify 	the 	citizenship 	of–every
individual or entity whose citizenship is attributed to that party or intervenor:
(A) When the action is filed in or removed to federal court, and
(B) when any later event occurs that could affect the court’s jurisdiction
under § 1332(a).
Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1(a)(2). Plaintiff, simultaneously with its reply, filed its Disclosure of Corporate
Interests. (Doc. 18). As Plaintiff has filed its Disclosure of Corporate Interests, the Court finds that
this motion is now unopposed and will grant the relief Plaintiff seeks.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated herein, Plaintiff’s Motion for Stay is GRANTED. This case is
hereby stayed pending resolution by this Court regarding Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand. (Doc. 11).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: 	March 17, 2026 	/s/ Douglas Harpool
DOUGLAS HARPOOL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 2:26-cv-04042-MDH Document 24 Filed 03/17/26 Page 2 of 2