A.H. v. West Contra Costa Unified School District
- Martinez-Olguin
- 3:22-cv-03233
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In A. H. v. West Contra Costa Unified School District, Judge Martinez-Olguin ordered briefing on jurisdiction before deciding defendants’ summary-judgment motion.
A. H., Summer Sigler, and West Contra Costa Unified School District; the order requires the parties to brief whether the court may continue hearing A. H.’s state-law claims if the Title IX claim fails.
What happened
A. H. v. West Contra Costa Unified School District concerns Defendants Summer Sigler and West Contra Costa Unified School District’s motion for summary judgment on A. H.’s remaining claims.
Only one remaining claim arises under federal law: A. H.’s Title IX discrimination claim against the District. The other remaining claims arise under state law.
The court ordered the parties to file briefs addressing whether it may continue hearing the state-law claims if the Title IX claim fails on the merits. Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin did not decide the summary-judgment motion or the jurisdiction question in this order.
The detailed version
- A.H. v. West Contra Costa Unified School District · No. 3:22-cv-03233
- Martinez-Olguin
- Dec. 8, 2025
Background
Defendants Summer Sigler and West Contra Costa Unified School District moved for summary judgment on all of A. H.’s remaining causes of action. The opinion states that only one remaining cause of action arises under federal law: a Title IX discrimination claim against the District. The remaining claims arise under state law.
Issue Before the Court
The court ordered supplemental briefing on whether it could exercise supplemental jurisdiction—authority to hear related state-law claims in the same case—if it determined that the Title IX claim failed on the merits. The order identified the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc. v. Wullschleger, 604 U.S. 22 (2025), as relevant to that question.
Order
The court ordered the parties to file supplemental briefs no longer than three pages by 10:00 a.m. on December 12, 2025. This order did not decide the summary-judgment motion, the Title IX claim, or whether the court could exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state-law claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.