Mario Mendoza v. Venemous Detailing LLC, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of California orders the plaintiff to show cause why the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims arising under California disability-access and negligence statutes. The court discusses California’s heightened pleading requirements and high-frequency litigant provisions for Unruh Act claims, as well as comity and exceptional circumstances under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c). Plaintiff must respond by January 8, 2026, identify the statutory damages sought, and provide declarations addressing high-frequency-litigant status.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act, California Disabled Persons Act, California Health and Safety Code, and negligence claims.
2. Whether plaintiff must provide information regarding the amount of statutory damages sought and declarations addressing whether plaintiff and counsel satisfy California's definition of a high-frequency litigant.

Disposition

other