Harrison Kinney v. Nob Hill Grill , 710 F. App'x 783 ( 2018 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
FEB 09 2018
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HARRISON BENJAMIN KINNEY, No. 17-15255
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:16-cv-03211-CRB
v.
MEMORANDUM*
NOB HILL GRILL; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Charles R. Breyer, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 6, 2018**
San Francisco, California
Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and D.W. NELSON and CHRISTEN, Circuit
Judges.
Harrison Kinney appeals the district court’s grant against him of judgment
on the pleadings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we
affirm in part and dismiss in part.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Plaintiff’s claim for prospective injunctive relief under the Americans with
Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et. seq., became moot when the restaurant
closed.
Given the absence of any available relief under federal law, the district court
did not abuse its discretion in declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over
plaintiff’s state-law claims. 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3); City of Colton v. American
Promotional Events, Inc.-West, 614 F.3d 998, 1008 (9th Cir. 2010).
Given our resolution of this appeal, we need not decide any other question
presented by this case.
All pending motions are denied as moot.
AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART.
2