Michael Rhambo v. Butterfly Spa, 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 claims under California's Unruh Civil Rights Act and any other state-law claims. The court also requires the plaintiff and counsel to provide declarations concerning high-frequency-litigant status and to identify the statutory damages sought, warning that failure to respond may result in dismissal.

Holdings

1. The court ordered plaintiff to show cause in writing why the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim and any other state-law claim asserted in the complaint.
2. The court required plaintiff to identify the amount of statutory damages sought and required plaintiff and plaintiff's counsel to submit declarations under penalty of perjury containing facts necessary to determine whether they satisfy California's high-frequency-litigant definition.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim and any other state-law claims under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1367(a) and 1367(c).
2. What amount of statutory damages plaintiff seeks and whether plaintiff and counsel satisfy California's definition of a high-frequency litigant.

Disposition

other