Opinion
Case No. 2:15-cv-1121-AB (GJS)
01-12-2016
GEO EDWARD MCCALIP, Plaintiff v. TED CONFERENCES, LLC et al., Defendants.
ORDER PARTIALLY ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the First Amended Complaint and all pleadings, motions, and other documents filed in this action, the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge ("Report"), and the parties' Objections to the Report. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Court has conducted a de novo review of those portions of the Report to which objections have been stated.
The Court adopts the findings, recommendations, and conclusions set forth in the Report, except that the Court dismisses all claims in the First Amended Complaint with prejudice for the following reasons. The United States Magistrate Judge did not err when recommending that the Court exercise its discretion to decline jurisdiction over a state law claim once all federal claims have been dismissed. Nonetheless, in the interests of judicial economy and considering Defendants' objections, the Court finds that it will retain jurisdiction over Plaintiff's California Civil Code § 52.1 claim. Further, the Court dismisses the state law claim with prejudice because Plaintiff cannot demonstrate state action under California Civil Code § 52.1 for the same reasons he cannot demonstrate state action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Jones v. Kmart Corp., 17 Cal.4th 329, 333-34 (1998); see also Vasquez v. Cty. of Los Angeles, 594 Fed. App'x 386, 387 (9th Cir. Feb. 26, 2015) (where § 1983 was dismissed for lack of state action, affirming dismissal of § 52.1 claim on same grounds). The Court sees no reason to require Defendants to defend against an ultimately fatal, identical lawsuit in California state court.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:
(1) Judgment be entered in favor of Defendants; and
(2) all claims of the First Amended Complaint are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. DATE: January 12, 2016
/s/_________
ANDRÉ BIROTTE JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE