Khapabhai Patel v. City of Los Angeles

MEMORANDUM

Khapabhai Patel and Pramilaben Patel (“Appellants”) appeal the district court’s decision to abstain from the exercise of jurisdiction under Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co., 312 U.S. 496 , 61 S.Ct. 643 , 85 L.Ed. 971 (1941). We affirm.

Appellants challenge the City of Los Angeles Housing Department’s determination that their motel is a “residential hotel” subject to the provisions of the Residential Hotel Unit Conversion and Demolition Ordinance (“Ordinance”), Los Angeles Municipal Code §§ 47.70-.89 (2008). In their complaint, Appellants assert a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and several state law claims. The district court granted the City’s motion to abstain under Pullman, stayed the Appellants’ federal causes of action, and dismissed the state causes of action.

In order to determine whether Pullman abstention is appropriate, we use a three-part test:

C-Y Dev. Co. v. City of Redlands, 703 F.2d 375 , 377 (9th Cir.1983) (internal quotation marks omitted). We review de novo the presence of the appropriate factors under the Pullman doctrine. If the Pullman requirements are met, we review the district court’s decision to abstain under an abuse of discretion standard.…