Teresi Investments v. City of Mountain View

Filing 77

ORDER REMANDING CASE. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 1/8/2013. (ejdlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/8/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

TERESI INVESTMENTS III, a California
Limited Partnership,

12
13
14
15
16
17

Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW, a Municipal
Corporation, and DOES 1–10, inclusive,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 5:10-CV-04714 EJD
ORDER REMANDING CASE

In the above entitled action, this Court has previously granted Defendant’s Motion for

18

Summary Judgment, which effectively disposed of all of the claims in Plaintiff’s Amended

19

Complaint. See Order Granting Def.’s Mot. for Summ. J., Docket Item No. 69. It its Answer to the

20

Amended Complaint, Defendant had filed various state-based counterclaims. See Def.’s Answer

21

and Countercl., Docket Item No. 25. Because the claims supporting federal question jurisdiction

22

were resolved against Plaintiff in the Order Granting Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment,

23

the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law

24

counterclaims; as such, those counterclaims shall be remanded to the state court from which it

25

originated for further proceedings. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) Carnegie-

26

Mellon Univ. v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343, 350 n.7 (1988); Acri v. Varian Assocs., Inc., 114 F.3d 999,

27

1000 (9th Cir. 1997) (en banc).

28
1
Case No.: 5:10-CV-04714 EJD
ORDER REMANDING CASE

1
2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

3

Dated: January 8, 2013

4

_________________________________
EDWARD J. DAVILA
United States District Judge

5
6
7
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Case No.: 5:10-CV-04714 EJD
ORDER REMANDING CASE