Sepulveda v. Perez

Background

Richard Sepulveda’s operative complaint asserted four claims. He moved for default judgment on two of them: a claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act and a claim under California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act. Judge Ryu issued a report and recommendation recommending that the motion be granted.

The court observed that the report and recommendation did not address whether the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim. Supplemental jurisdiction is a federal court’s authority to hear related state-law claims along with federal claims. The court issued an order directing Sepulveda to explain why it should not decline that jurisdiction. Sepulveda did not respond by the deadline.

Ruling

The court treated Sepulveda’s failure to respond as a concession that, under the authorities cited in the order, it should decline supplemental jurisdiction. The court therefore declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim and denied Sepulveda’s motion for default judgment without prejudice.

The court also declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims and dismissed those claims without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(4). The opinion states that, although the order to show cause formally addressed the Unruh Act claim, Sepulveda had sufficient notice and an opportunity to be heard concerning the other state-law claims as well.

The denial of the default-judgment motion did not bar Sepulveda from moving for default judgment on the Americans with Disabilities Act claim.