Samuel Marez et al v. State of California et al

Filing 16

MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER DISMISSING Federal Claims and REMANDING Action to Los Angeles County Superior Court by Judge John F. Walter: The Court approves the parties stipulation, and DISMISSES the first and second causes of action alleged in Plainti ffs Complaint with prejudice. Pursuant to the parties stipulation and in light of the fact that the Court has dismissed the only claims over which this Court has original jurisdiction, and after considering judicial economy, convenience, fairness, and comity, the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs remaining state law claims. Accordingly, this action is hereby REMANDED to Los Angeles County Superior Court. (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (jp)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JS-6

CIVIL MINUTES -- GENERAL
Case No.

CV 16-1803-JFW (SSx)

Title:

Samuel Marez, et al. -v- State of California, et al.

Date: April 20, 2016

PRESENT:
HONORABLE JOHN F. WALTER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Shannon Reilly
Courtroom Deputy

None Present
Court Reporter

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFFS:
None
PROCEEDINGS (IN CHAMBERS):

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANTS:
None

ORDER DISMISSING FEDERAL CLAIMS AND
REMANDING ACTION TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY
SUPERIOR COURT

On April 19, 2016, the parties filed a Stipulation and Order Re Dismissal of Action
(“Stipulation”) [Docket No. 15], in which the parties have agreed and request that the Court: (1)
dismiss the first and second causes of action arising under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 with prejudice, and
(2) remand this action to Los Angeles County Superior Court. The Court approves the parties’
stipulation, and DISMISSES the first and second causes of action alleged in Plaintiffs’ Complaint
with prejudice. Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation and in light of the fact that the Court has
dismissed the only claims over which this Court has original jurisdiction, and after considering
judicial economy, convenience, fairness, and comity, the Court declines to exercise supplemental
jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ remaining state law claims. See 28 U.S.C.§ 1367(c); Satey v. JPMorgan
Chase & Co., 521 F.3d 1087, 1091 (9th Cir. 2008) (quoting Carnegie-Mellon Univ. v. Cohill, 484
U.S. 343, 351 (1988) (“[I]n the usual case in which all federal-law claims are eliminated before trial,
the balance of factors to be considered under the pendent jurisdiction doctrine – judicial economy,
convenience, fairness, and comity – will point toward declining to exercise jurisdiction over the
remaining state law claims.’”). Accordingly, this action is hereby REMANDED to Los Angeles
County Superior Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Page 1 of 1

Initials of Deputy Clerk sr