Alvaro Orosco v. Cuernavaca Investments, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ALVARO OROSCO, Case No. 2:23-cv-06017-WLH-MARx 11 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE COURT SHOULD EXERCISE v. S OU VP EP RL TE HM EE N STT AA TL E J U LR AI WSD CI LC AT II MON S CUERNAVACA INVESTMENTS,

LLC ET AL,

15 Defendant.

17 The Complaint filed in this action asserts a claim for injunctive relief arising out 18 of an alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (the “ADA”) and a 19 claim for damages pursuant to California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act (the “Unruh Act”), 20 Cal. Civ. Code §§ 51-53. In the Complaint, Plaintiff requests the court exercise 21 supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367. 22 The United States Supreme Court has recognized supplemental jurisdiction “is 23 a doctrine of discretion, not of plaintiff’s right, and that district courts can decline to 24 exercise jurisdiction over pendent claims for a number of valid reasons.” City of Chi. 25 v. Int’l Coll. of Surgeons, 522…