Summary
The United States District Court for the Central District of California ordered 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 required the plaintiff and counsel to provide declarations addressing whether they qualify as high-frequency litigants and to identify the statutory damages sought, with a response due February 5, 2026.
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Civil Rights Act claim and any other state-law claims alleged in the complaint.
- What statutory damages plaintiff seeks to recover.
- Whether plaintiff and plaintiff's counsel satisfy the California statutory definition of a high-frequency litigant.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (2)
- City of Chicago v. International College of Surgeons, 522 U.S. 156, 173, 118 S. Ct. 523, 534, 139 L. Ed. 2d 525 (1997)(followed)
- Carnegie-Mellon University v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343, 350, 108 S. Ct. 614, 619, 98 L. Ed. 2d 720 (1988)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…