Ignacio Vera v. Adobe Cantina, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IGNACIO VERA, Case No. 2:24-cv-05102-SB-E

Plaintiff,

v.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

ADOBE CANTINA, INC. et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff Ignacio Vera, who requires the use of a wheelchair at all times when traveling in public, filed this suit alleging that Defendants Adobe Cantina, Inc. and 29100 Agoura, LLC failed to maintain adequate parking facilities, in violation of, inter alia, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Unruh Act. Dkt. No. 1.

Because Plaintiff’s Unruh Act claim is closely related to his ADA claim, the Court has authority to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a). However, supplemental jurisdiction “is a doctrine of discretion, not of plaintiff’s right,” and district courts “can decline to exercise jurisdiction over pendent claims for a number of valid reasons.” City of Chi. v. Int’l Coll. of Surgeons, 522 U.S. 156, 172 (1997) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). This discretion is codified in § 1367(c):

The district courts may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over a claim under subsection (a) if—…