Usdc-Mbu

MEMORANDUM

Petitioners seek an interlocutory Writ of Mandamus ordering the district court to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims in a pending action. They contend that the court failed to comply with the mandate of this court in Josephs v. Gallatin County et. al., 385 Fed.Appx. 671 (9th Cir.2010) (“Gallatin I”). We deny the petition.

The district court erred in concluding that the prior appeal did not require reinstatement of the supplemental state law claims as directed by this Court when it revived the federal claim on appeal in Gallatin I. See Craig v. M & O Agencies, Inc., 496 F.3d 1047 , 1060 n. 5 (9th Cir. 2007). The district court’s conclusion to the contrary violated the mandate of our Court in Gallatin I, which would normally require the issuance of a Writ of Mandate. Vizcaino v. U.S. District Court, 173 F.3d 713 , 719 (9th Cir.1999).

However, the district court made an alternative holding declining supplemental jurisdiction in the exercise of its discretion, relying on 28 U.S.C. § 1367 (c)(2) and (c)(4). This separate basis for declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction did not violate Gallatin I’s mandate. Gallatin I cited Idaho v. Howmet…