Opinion
22-cv-01899-VC
08-12-2022
RICHARD SEPULVEDA, Plaintiff, v. MOHAMED GAZALI, et al., Defendants.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE COURT SHOULD EXERCISE SUPPLEMENTAL JURISDICTION
VINCE CHHABRIA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Federal courts may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over a state law claim “in exceptional circumstances.” 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(4). When a “high-frequency” litigant asserts a California Unruh Act claim in federal court alongside an ADA claim, this will typically constitute an exceptional circumstance that justifies dismissal of the Unruh Act claim. See Arroyo v. Rosas, 19 F.4th 1202, 1211-14 (9th Cir. 2021); Garcia v. Maciel, 2022 WL 395316, at *2-5 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 9, 2022). The plaintiff is therefore ordered to show cause why this Court should not decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim.
The plaintiff must respond within 21 days of this order. Failure to respond will result in a dismissal of this action with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED. 1