Colton Bryant v. Excel Car Stereo, Inc. et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of California orders Plaintiff Colton Bryant to show cause why his Unruh Act claim should not be dismissed without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(4). The court relies on the Ninth Circuit’s discussion in Arroyo v. Rosas that retaining supplemental jurisdiction over ADA-based Unruh Act claims may create exceptional federal-state comity concerns, and requires Plaintiff to provide information concerning damages and high-frequency-litigant status.

Holdings

1. Because the case is at an early stage and may present the exceptional circumstances and federal-state comity concerns recognized in Arroyo v. Rosas, the court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why the Unruh Act claim should not be dismissed without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(4).

Questions Presented

1. Whether the court should decline supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's Unruh Act claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(4) because exceptional circumstances and federal-state comity concerns identified in Arroyo v. Rosas may be present.
2. Whether Plaintiff should be required to identify the statutory damages sought and submit sworn factual information concerning whether Plaintiff and his counsel qualify as high-frequency litigants under California law.

Disposition

other