Summary
This is a United States District Court civil minutes order directing Plaintiff to show cause why the court should not decline supplemental jurisdiction over the California Unruh Civil Rights Act claim. The order requires Plaintiff and counsel to submit declarations addressing whether they meet California’s definition of a high-frequency litigant and warns that failure to respond may result in dismissal of the Unruh Act claim without prejudice.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court should decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c), including subsection (c)(4).
Holdings
- The court did not make a final determination; instead, it ordered Plaintiff to show cause in writing why the court should not decline supplemental jurisdiction and warned that failure to respond would result in dismissal of the Unruh Act claim without prejudice.
Key quotations
“Failure to respond as ordered will result in the Court declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim and dismissing that claim without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c).” (at 1)
Factual background
The complaint alleges violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and California's Unruh Civil Rights Act and seeks damages and injunctive relief. The court required factual declarations from Plaintiff and Plaintiff's counsel regarding the statutory definition of a high-frequency litigant, apparently because those facts bear on whether the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim.
Procedural history
Plaintiff filed a complaint asserting damages and injunctive-relief claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act and California's Unruh Civil Rights Act. The district court had not yet decided whether to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim and ordered Plaintiff to submit a written response supported by declarations concerning whether Plaintiff and counsel qualify as high-frequency litigants.