Mario Mendoza v. Jose Enrique Pelayo, et al.

Summary

The court orders Plaintiff Mario Mendoza to show cause why it should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over claims under California's Unruh Civil Rights Act and other state laws. The response must address the amount of statutory damages sought and provide facts concerning whether Plaintiff or counsel qualifies as a high-frequency litigant under California law, with a filing deadline of January 5, 2026.

Holdings

1. The district court may raise subject-matter-jurisdiction concerns sua sponte and ordered Plaintiff to show cause why the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act and other state-law claims.
2. The court ordered Plaintiff to provide, in declarations signed under penalty of perjury, the amount of statutory damages sought under the Unruh Act and sufficient facts to determine whether Plaintiff or Plaintiff's counsel meets California's definition of a high-frequency litigant.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's Unruh Civil Rights Act claim and other state-law claims.
2. Whether Plaintiff must provide the amount of Unruh Act statutory damages sought and facts relevant to whether Plaintiff or Plaintiff's counsel qualifies as a high-frequency litigant.

Disposition

other