Garcia v. Quong Fook Tong

Background

Orlando Garcia brought claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act. He alleged that real property owned by Quong Fook Tong did not satisfy the accessibility requirements of those laws.

Motion to dismiss

Quong Fook Tong filed a motion to dismiss directed at Garcia’s original complaint. Garcia responded by filing an amended complaint rather than opposing the motion. In its reply, Quong Fook Tong argued that the amended complaint still had the defects identified in the motion and asked the court to dismiss it.

The court denied the motion as moot. It explained that the motion did not address the operative pleading—the complaint currently controlling the case—and that Garcia had not had an opportunity to respond to the argument that the amended complaint should be dismissed. The court stated that Quong Fook Tong would need to file a renewed motion addressing the amended complaint under the court’s Civil Local Rules.

Unruh Act claim

The court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction, meaning authority to hear a related state-law claim alongside a federal claim, over Garcia’s Unruh Act claim. Relying on the reasons stated in the court’s earlier related proceeding and in Arroyo v. Rosas, the court dismissed the Unruh Act claim without prejudice to Garcia asserting it in state court.

Disposition

Judge Joseph C. Spero denied Quong Fook Tong’s motion to dismiss as moot and dismissed Garcia’s Unruh Act claim without prejudice. The opinion does not rule on the adequacy of the amended complaint’s ADA claim.