Johnson v. Ku
- Vince Chhabria
- 3:21-cv-08829
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Johnson v. Ku, Judge Chhabria dismissed Scott Johnson’s Unruh Act claim after declining supplemental jurisdiction and ordered the defendant to choose the next jurisdictional step.
Scott Johnson’s Unruh Act claim was dismissed. George Ku and the other defendants must notify the court within 14 days whether they want jurisdictional discovery or an evidentiary hearing.
What happened
In Johnson v. Ku, Scott Johnson sued George Ku and others, and the court addressed Johnson’s claim under California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act. The opinion states that the case was still in its early stages and refers to Johnson as a frequent filer of Americans with Disabilities Act and Unruh Act claims.
The court declined to keep the Unruh Act claim under its supplemental jurisdiction, meaning its authority to hear a related state-law claim alongside a federal claim. It said that judicial efficiency, convenience, fairness, and respect for California courts did not support keeping the claim. The court also found that the circumstances described in the opinion supported declining jurisdiction under the federal jurisdiction statute.
The order dismissed the Unruh Act claim. It also required the defendant, within 14 days, to tell the court whether it wanted three months of jurisdiction-related discovery or preferred to proceed directly to an evidentiary hearing. Judge Vince Chhabria said that discovery, if chosen, could address Johnson’s intent to return and whether he had personally visited the defendant’s establishment.
The detailed version
- Johnson v. Ku · No. 3:21-cv-08829
- Vince Chhabria
- July 6, 2022
Background
The opinion concerns Scott Johnson’s claim under California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act against George Ku and other defendants. The order refers to the case as being in its early stages and describes the facts as involving a frequent filer of Americans with Disabilities Act and Unruh Act claims seeking federal jurisdiction to avoid California procedural barriers to those suits.
Jurisdictional ruling
The court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim. Supplemental jurisdiction is a federal court’s authority to hear a related state-law claim along with a federal claim. The court relied on the federal jurisdiction statute and concluded that judicial economy, convenience, fairness to the litigants, and respect for state courts did not favor retaining the claim because the case was at an early stage.
The court also cited the circumstances described in the opinion as the type of exceptional circumstances that permit a federal court to decline supplemental jurisdiction. The opinion cites Arroyo v. Rosas, 19 F.4th 1202, 1211–14 (9th Cir. 2021), and Whitaker v. Alice & Olivia California Holdings LLC, 2022 WL 1135088, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 18, 2022).
Disposition and next step
The order is titled “Order Dismissing Unruh Act Claim,” and the court dismissed that claim. The defendant must notify the court within 14 days whether it wants a three-month period of jurisdictional discovery or instead wants to move directly to an evidentiary hearing. If the defendant chooses discovery, the permitted subjects will include Johnson’s intent to return and whether Johnson personally visited the defendant’s establishment. The order was issued by United States District Judge Vince Chhabria.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.