Johnson v. Savvy Cellar Wines, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 SCOTT JOHNSON, Case No. 4:21-cv-09163-YGR Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE g v. SAVVY CELLAR WINES, Defendant. A federal court may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over a state law claim “in || exceptional circumstances.” 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(4). Supplemental jurisdiction “is a doctrine of || discretion, not of plaintiff's right.” United Mine Workers of Am. v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715, 726 || (1966). When a “high-frequency” litigant such as plaintiff asserts a California Unruh Act claim in || federal court with an ADA claim, this typically constitutes an exceptional circumstance that a 16 || justifies dismissal of the Unruh Act claim. See Arroyo v. Rosas, 19 F.4th 1202, 1211-14 (9th Cir. || 2021); Garcia v. Maciel, No. 21-cv-03743-JC, 2022 WL 395316 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 9, 2022). In || light of the foregoing, plaintiff is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why this Court should not 19 ||…