Opinion
CV 24-3220 PA (JCx)
04-22-2024
Law Offices of Phoenix Thottam v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., et al.
Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Phoenix Thottam (video) Attorneys Present for Defendants: Gregory Nylen (video) Kamran Khakbaz (video) Austinn Kenney (tel)
Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:
Phoenix Thottam (video)
Attorneys Present for Defendants:
Gregory Nylen (video)
Kamran Khakbaz (video)
Austinn Kenney (tel)
PRESENT THE HONORABLE PERCY ANDERSON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Proceedings: STATUS CONFERENCE by ZOOM
Cause called. Appearances made. Court and counsel confer concerning the Notice of Removal filed by defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (“JPMorgan”). Plaintiff Law Offices of Phoenix Thottam (“Plaintiff”) voluntarily dismissed his federal claim alleging a violation of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i).
While the Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's remaining state law claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a), the Court may decline supplemental jurisdiction under § 1367(c) if: “(1) the claim raises a novel or complex issue of State law, (2) the claim substantially predominates over the claim or claims over which the district court has original jurisdiction, (3) the district court dismissed all claims over which it has original jurisdiction, or (4) in exceptional circumstances, there are other compelling reasons for declining jurisdiction.” Here, Plaintiff has voluntarily dismissed all federal claims over which the Court had original jurisdiction. Accordingly, the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's remaining state law claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3). The Court further exercises its discretion to remand the action. See Albingia Versicherungs A.G. v. Schenker Int'l Inc., 344 F.3d 931, 938 (9th Cir. 2003); Harrell v. 20th Century Ins. Co., 934 F.2d 203, 205 (9th Cir. 1991) (“[A] district court has discretion to remand a properly removed case to state court when none of the federal claims are remaining.”). The Court remands this action to Los Angeles County Superior Court, Case No. 24STCV09768. The Court denies Plaintiff's Motion to Remand (Docket No. 6) as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.