From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rodriguez v. Ralphs Grocery

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Apr 24, 2009
323 F. App'x 617 (9th Cir. 2009)

Opinion

No. 07-56822.

Submitted April 13, 2009.

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).

Filed April 24, 2009.

Morse Mehrban, Esq., Morse Mehrban Law Offices, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Marc Koenigsberg, Esq., Livingston Mattesich Law Corporation, Sacramento, CA, Gregory F. Hurley, Esq., Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Irvine, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Manuel L. Real, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-07-02311-R.

Before: LEAVY, GOULD, and BEA, Circuit Judges.



MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Felix C. Rodriguez and Kenneth Ntim appeal from the district court's judgment dismissing their federal and state law disability discrimination claims. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Get Outdoors II, LLC v. City of San Diego, 506 F.3d 886, 890 (9th Cir. 2007). We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

Appellants do not challenge the district court's bases for dismissing their claims, but only the dismissal of their state law claims with prejudice.

We vacate the judgment to the extent it dismisses the state law claims with prejudice, and remand for the sole purpose of dismissing those claims without prejudice. see Herman Family Revocable Trust v. Teddy Bear, 254 F.3d 802, 805-07 (9th Cir. 2001) (explaining that if the federal claim is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, a district court has no discretion to retain the supplemental claims for adjudication, and must dismiss the state law claims without prejudice).

The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.

AFFIRMED in part, VACATED in part, and REMANDED.


Summaries of

Rodriguez v. Ralphs Grocery

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Apr 24, 2009
323 F. App'x 617 (9th Cir. 2009)
Case details for

Rodriguez v. Ralphs Grocery

Case Details

Full title:Felix C. RODRIGUEZ; et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. RALPHS GROCERY…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Apr 24, 2009

Citations

323 F. App'x 617 (9th Cir. 2009)

Citing Cases

Moore v. Saniefar

The only remaining course is to dismiss Plaintiff's remaining state law claims without prejudice. See, e.g.,…

Strong v. Kenny

Similarly, there is no basis for the Court's exercise of jurisdiction over the supplemental claims. See…