Yates v. Mammoth Community Water District

Filing 17

ORDER signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 12/4/2015 ORDERING that defendant's motion to dismiss 8 is GRANTED with respect to plaintiff's only federal claim; the Court DECLINES to exercise jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims; REMANDING CASE to the Superior Court of CA, Mono County. Copy of remand order sent to other court. CASE CLOSED(Reader, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RONALD YATES, JR.,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

No. 2:15-cv-1762 WBS CKD PS

v.

ORDER

MAMMOTH COMMUNITY WATER
DISTRICT,
Defendant.

16
17

Plaintiff filed the above-entitled action in propria persona. The action was removed from

18
19

state court. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule

20

302(c).

21

On November 5, 2015, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein

22

which were served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objections to

23

the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Objections to the

24

findings and recommendations have been filed.

25

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this

26

court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the

27

court adopts the magistrate judge’s analysis only with respect to dismissal of plaintiff’s federal

28

claim, and will dismiss that claim with prejudice. In his Opposition to the findings and
1

1

recommendations, plaintiff states that he no longer wishes to pursue his federal claim, so no leave

2

to amend need be given with respect to that claim. Since remaining state law claims will be

3

remanded to the state court for the reasons recommended by the magistrate judge, it would be

4

inappropriate for this court to rule on the sufficiency of them or to give plaintiff leave to amend

5

one of those claims in this court. That will be for the state court to decide on remand.

6

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 8)

7

is granted with respect to plaintiff’s only federal claim; the court declines to exercise jurisdiction

8

over the remaining state law claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3); and this action is hereby

9

REMANDED to the Superior Court of California, County of Mono.

10

Dated: December 4, 2015

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2