Garcia v. Kim et al
ORDER Dismissing Unruh Act Claim. Signed by Judge Vince Chhabria on 09/15/2022. (vclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/15/2022)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case No. 21-cv-09789-VC
ORDER DISMISSING UNRUH ACT
Re: Dkt. No. 33
JONGGAN KIM, et al.,
1. The Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim. See
Arroyo v. Rosas, 19 F. 4th 1202, 1211–14 (9th Cir. 2021). The case is in its early stages, so
concerns of judicial economy, convenience, fairness to litigants, and comity do not favor
retaining jurisdiction. See id. at 1214. And the facts of the case—“a frequent filer of ADA and
Unruh Act claims seeking federal jurisdiction to circumvent California's procedural barriers to
such suits—present the type of exceptional circumstances contemplated by section 1367(c)(4)”
to decline supplemental jurisdiction. Whitaker v. Alice & Olivia California Holdings LLC, 2022
WL 1135088, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 18, 2022).
2. The defendant shall notify the Court within 14 days of this order whether it would like
a 3-month period of jurisdictional discovery or whether it would instead prefer to move directly
to an evidentiary hearing. If the defendant opts for jurisdictional discovery, it will be permitted to
take discovery on the plaintiff’s intent to return and whether the plaintiff did, in fact, personally
visit the defendant’s establishment in the first place.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: September 15, 2022
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?