Thompson v. University Medical Center ( 2019 )

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 GRACE THOMPSON, Case No.: 2:18-cv-01803-APG-VCF 4 Plaintiff Order Remanding Case to State Court 5 v. 6 UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER, et al., 7 Defendants 8 At the June 12, 2019 hearing, I dismissed the federal claims in this case, which were the 9 basis for removal from state court. ECF Nos. 1, 24. I granted leave to amend the federal claims 10 but advised the plaintiffs that if they did not file an amended complaint by July 31, 2019, I would 11 decline supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims and remand this matter to state court. 12 The plaintiffs have not filed an amended complaint. 13 The plaintiffs’ remaining claims arise under state law, and those claims are before me 14 under supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a). I may decline to exercise 15 supplemental jurisdiction over a state law claim if “(1) the claim raises a novel or complex issue 16 of State law, (2) the claim substantially predominates over the claim or claims over which the 17 district court has original jurisdiction, (3) the district court has dismissed all claims over which it 18 has original jurisdiction, or (4) in exceptional circumstances, there are other compelling reasons 19 for declining jurisdiction.” 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c). Should one of these factors be present, I 20 consider whether continuing to exercise supplemental jurisdiction promotes economy, 21 convenience, fairness, and comity. Acri v. Varian Assocs., Inc., 114 F.3d 999, 1001 (9th Cir. 22 1997). Whether to decline the exercise of supplemental jurisdiction under § 1367(c) lies within 23 my discretion. Satey v. JPMorgan Chase & Co., 521 F.3d 1087, 1090 (9th Cir. 2008). 1 I have dismissed the only claims supporting original jurisdiction in this court. The plaintiffs originally brought suit in state court, and now that the claim supporting removal has been dismissed, remand is appropriate. The case has not progressed so far in federal court that concerns about economy or convenience are implicated. I therefore decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims, and I remand this case to the state court from which it was removed. 7 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the case is remanded to the state court from which it was removed for all further proceedings. The Clerk of the Court is instructed to close this case. 9 DATED this 6th day of August, 2019. ANDREW P. GORDON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23