George Jones v. LBC Investment Capital Inc. et al
| George Jones |
| LBC INVESTMENT CAPITAL INC and DOES 1-10 |
| 2:2021cv09121 |
| November 22, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Stanley Blumenfeld |
| Patricia Donahue |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 14, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
MINUTE ORDER DECLINING SUPPLEMENTAL JURISDICTION AND DISMISSING UNRUH ACT CLAIM by Judge Stanley Blumenfeld, Jr.: On 12/15/2021, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why it should not decline supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's Unruh Act claim in light of the exceptional circumstances described in the Ninth Circuit's recent decision in Arroyo v. Rosas, 19 F.4th 1202 (9th Cir. 2021) #10 . Plaintiff's response consists largely of generic, irrelevant arguments and does not meaningfully address the Arroyo court's comity concerns #11 . For the reasons in this order, the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs Unruh Act claim and dismisses the claim without prejudice. See document for further details. Court Reporter: N/A. (gk)
|
| Filing 11 RESPONSE filed by Plaintiff George Jonesto Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive - no proceeding held,,,, #10 (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Peter Shahriari, #2 Declaration of George Jones)(Steven, Laura) |
|
Filing 10
MINUTE ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge Stanley Blumenfeld, Jr.: This case is still at a very early stage, and this Court has not yet addressed or adjudicated the merits of any of Plaintiff's claims. This appears to be a case in which the Court should decline supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's Unruh Act claim under Section 1367(c)(4) to protect the comity interests identified in Arroyo v. Rosas, No. 19-55974, 2021 WL 5858598 (9th Cir. Dec. 10, 2021). Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff within 14 days after entry of this Order to show cause in writing why the Court should not dismiss without prejudice her Unruh Act claim under Section 1367(c)(4). If Plaintiff fails to file a response within 14 days after entry of this Order, the Court will decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over her Unruh Act claim, and the Unruh Act claim will be automatically dismissed without prejudice without further order of the Court. See document for further details. Court Reporter: N/A. (gk)
|
|
Filing 9
CIVIL STANDING ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Stanley Blumenfeld, Jr. (vcr)
|
| Filing 8 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant LBC Investment Capital Inc. (jtil) |
| Filing 7 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (jtil) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (jtil) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Stanley Blumenfeld, Jr and Magistrate Judge Patricia Donahue. (jtil) |
| Filing 4 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by plaintiff George Jones, (Shahriari, Peter) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff George Jones. (Shahriari, Peter) |
| Filing 2 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by plaintiff George Jones. (Shahriari, Peter) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-32364856 - Fee: $402, filed by plaintiff George Jones. (Attorney Peter Shahriari added to party George Jones(pty:pla))(Shahriari, Peter) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
