Dawn Stevens v. Indimex Eats LLC et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAWN STEVENS, Case No. 2:25-cv-12384-SB-MBK

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

INDIMEX EATS LLC et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff Dawn Stevens, who is substantially limited in her ability to walk due to an above-the-knee amputation, filed this suit alleging that Defendants’ restaurant imposes physical barriers that impede her access, in violation of, inter alia, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Unruh Act.

Because Plaintiff’s Unruh Act claim is closely related to her 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— (1)…