Gomez

Gomez v. Del Dotto Vineyards

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaApril 22, 20224:21-cv-09601California997 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 ANDRES GOMEZ, Case No. 21-cv-09601-JST

Plaintiff,

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

v.

DEL DOTTO VINEYARDS, Defendant.

12 On December 13, 2021, Plaintiff Andres Gomez filed this action against Defendant Del Dotto Vineyards, alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act (“Unruh Act”) in relation to the Del Dotto Vineyards website. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief under the ADA, nominal damages, statutory damages under the Unruh Act, and attorney’s fees and costs. Id. at 9. Plaintiff contends that this Court has federal question jurisdiction over the ADA claim and supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act and other state law claims. Id. ¶¶ 7-8. Supplemental jurisdiction “is a doctrine of discretion, not of plaintiff’s right.” United Mine Workers v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715, 726 (1966). District courts have discretion to decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction if: “(1) the claim raises a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.