From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Whitaker v. Eye Phone City

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 7, 2020
CV 19-2872 DSF (JEM) (C.D. Cal. Oct. 7, 2020)

Opinion

CV 19-2872 DSF (JEM)

10-07-2020

BRIAN WHITAKER, Plaintiff, v. EYE PHONE CITY, et al., Defendants.


JUDGMENT

The Court having dismissed this action for mootness and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims for relief,

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff take nothing, that the first claim for relief be dismissed with prejudice, and that the second claim for relief be dismissed without prejudice to filing in state court. Date: October 7, 2020

/s/_________

Dale S. Fischer

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Whitaker v. Eye Phone City

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 7, 2020
CV 19-2872 DSF (JEM) (C.D. Cal. Oct. 7, 2020)
Case details for

Whitaker v. Eye Phone City

Case Details

Full title:BRIAN WHITAKER, Plaintiff, v. EYE PHONE CITY, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Oct 7, 2020

Citations

CV 19-2872 DSF (JEM) (C.D. Cal. Oct. 7, 2020)

Citing Cases

Whitaker v. Chan

There is no reason to conclude that the alleged ADA violations at a hair salon are more capable of evading…

Trujillo v. Gogna

Although the Court addressed the merits of Plaintiff's ADA claim to the extent necessary to address the…