Gilbert v. Mane

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DARREN GILBERT, No. 1:22-cv-00574-ADA-SKO 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DECLINING 13 v. SUPPLEMENTAL JURISDICTION OVER STATE LAW CLAIMS MUSTAFA KAID ALI MANE dba Airport Grocery, (ECF No. 15) Defendant.

17 Plaintiff Darren Gilbert (“Plaintiff”) initiated this action on May 12, 2022, asserting a claim for injunctive relief arising out of an alleged violation of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and a claim for damages pursuant to California’s Unruh Act. (ECF No. 1.) The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

22 Following an order to show cause, (ECF No. 13), on April 14, 2023, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations, recommending that the Court decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state law claims and that those claims be dismissed, without prejudice, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(4). (ECF No. 15.) The findings and recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen days after service. (Id. at 7.) No objections have been filed, and the time /// | in which to do so has passed.

2 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c), this Court has conducted a | de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the | findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis.

5 Accordingly, 6 1. The findings and recommendations issued on April 14, 2023, CECF No. 15), are 7 ADOPTED in full; 8 2. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(4) and Vo v. Choi, 49 F.4th 1167 (9th Cir. 2022), 9 the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's Unruh Act 10 claim and Plaintiff's Cal. Health & Safety Code §§ 19955 and 19959 claims; 11 3, Plaintiff's Unruh Act and Cal. Health & Safety Code §§ 19955 and 19959 claims 12 are DISMISSED, without prejudice, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(4); and 13 4. This matter is referred back to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further 14 proceedings.

17 | TIS SO ORDERED.

18 Dated: _ June 6, 2023 19 UNITED fTATES DISTRICT JUDGE