Nataly Morales v. Amer Sports Canada Inc. et al

Filing 37

MINUTE : ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Sunshine Suzanne Sykes. Plaintiff shall file a Response to this Order to Show Cause by no later than December 2, 2022. The Court sets a hearing date regarding this Order to Show Cause on December 9, 2022 at 1:00 PM via zoom.1 This matter and all current deadlines are STAYED pending resolution of this Order to Show Cause. Plaintiffs failure to timely or adequately respond to this Order may, without further warning, result in the dismissal of the entire action without prejudice or the Court declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim and dismissing the claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c). IT IS SO ORDERED. (shb)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES—
GENERAL
Case No.

2:21-cv-07873-SSS-SKx

Date November 18, 2022

Title Nataly Morales v. Amer Sports Canada, Inc., et al.

Present: The Honorable

SUNSHINE S. SYKES, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Irene Vazquez

Not Reported

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter

Attorney(s) Present for Plaintiff(s):

Attorney(s) Present for Defendant(s):

None Present

None Present

Proceedings: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE (IN CHAMBERS)
The Complaint filed in this action asserts a claim for injunctive relief based
on an alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C.
§ 12181, and a claim for damages pursuant to California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act
(“Unruh Act”), Cal. Civ. Code § 51 et seq. The Court possesses only supplemental
jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a).
The supplemental jurisdiction statute “reflects the understanding that, when
deciding whether to exercise supplemental jurisdiction, ‘a federal court should
consider and weigh in each case, and at every stage of the litigation, the values of
judicial economy, convenience, fairness, and comity.’” City of Chicago v. Int’l
Coll. of Surgeons, 522 U.S. 156, 173 (1997) (emphasis added) (quoting CarnegieMellon Univ. v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343, 350 (1988)). The Court therefore orders
Plaintiff to show cause in writing why the Court should exercise supplemental
jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c).
Plaintiff shall identify the amount of statutory damages she seeks to recover.
Plaintiff and plaintiff’s counsel shall also support their responses to this Order with
declarations, signed under penalty of perjury, providing all facts necessary for the
Page 1 of 2

CIVIL MINUTES—
GENERAL

Initials of Deputy Clerk iv

Court to determine if they satisfy the definition of a “high-frequency litigant” as
provided by California Civil Procedure Code sections 425.55(b)(1) & (2).
Plaintiff shall file a Response to this Order to Show Cause by no later
than December 2, 2022. The Court sets a hearing date regarding this Order to
Show Cause on December 9, 2022 at 1:00 PM via zoom.1 This matter and all
current deadlines are STAYED pending resolution of this Order to Show Cause.
Plaintiff’s failure to timely or adequately respond to this Order may, without
further warning, result in the dismissal of the entire action without prejudice or the
Court declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim and
dismissing the claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c).
IT IS SO ORDERED.

1

The Court refers the Parties to Judge Sykes’ website for details regarding
hearings via zoom: https://www.cacd.uscourts.gov/honorable-sunshine-s-sykes.
Page 2 of 2

CIVIL MINUTES—
GENERAL

Initials of Deputy Clerk iv