Case Information
*1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JS-6 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES -- GENERAL
Case No. SA CV 14-1387-JFW (PJWx) Date: March 16, 2018 Title: Myoungchul Shin, et al. -v- UNI-CAPS, LLC, et al.
PRESENT:
HONORABLE JOHN F. WALTER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Shannon Reilly None Present Courtroom Deputy Court Reporter ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFFS: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANTS:
None None
PROCEEDINGS (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER DISMISSING FEDERAL CLAIMS
On October 23, 2017, the Ninth Circuit filed its Memorandum Opinion affirming in part and vacating in part the Court’s January 20, 2016 Order Granting Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment and/or Summary Adjudication. [1] Specifically, the Ninth Circuit held that “[t]he district court correctly granted summary judgment to Defendants on Plaintiffs’ federal retaliation claim.” In addition, the Ninth Circuit held that “[t]he district court correctly held that Defendants Kim and Shim were not Plaintiffs’ employers within the meaning of the FLSA’s overtime provision.” However, the Ninth Circuit vacated “the district court’s ruling on Plaintiffs’ claim for overtime compensation and remand[ed] for the district court to rule on the [Plaintiffs’] declarations’ admissibility and to reconsider Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on Plaintiffs’ FLSA overtime claim.” [2] In addition, the Ninth Circuit remanded for this Court to consider whether it will exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ state law claims.
After a February 1, 2018 status conference, the parties filed a Status Report on February 20, 2018. [3] Docket No. 278. In the Status Report, Plaintiffs “agree to dismiss the [remaining] *2 federal claims [against Uni-Caps, LLC], and file an action with the State Court with the claims under California state law.” Accordingly, after considering Defendants’ objections, the Court dismisses the FLSA overtime claim against Uni-Caps, LLC, and that sole remaining federal claim is DISMISSED without prejudice .
In light of the fact that the Court has dismissed the only claim over which this Court has original jurisdiction, and after considering judicial economy, convenience, fairness, and comity, the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ remaining state law claims. See 28 U.S.C.§ 1367(c); Satey v. JPMorgan Chase & Co. , 521 F.3d 1087, 1091 (9th Cir. 2008) (quoting Carnegie-Mellon Univ. v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343, 351 (1988) (“[I]n the usual case in which all federal-law claims are eliminated before trial, the balance of factors to be considered under the pendent jurisdiction doctrine – judicial economy, convenience, fairness, and comity – will point toward declining to exercise jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims.’”). Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ state law claims are DISMISSED without prejudice .
The Clerk is hereby ordered to close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Page 2 of 2 Initials of Deputy Clerk sr
[1] Plaintiff’s petition for a rehearing was denied, and the Ninth Circuit’s Mandate was issued on November 29, 2017.
[2] Because Kim and Shim are no longer defendants in this action, the FLSA overtime claim is only pending against Uni-Caps, LLC.
[3] On February 21, 2018, Defendants filed an Objection to Plaintiffs’ Status Report and Notice of Plaintiffs’ Petition for Write of Certiorari. Docket No. 279. On February 21, 2018, Plaintiffs filed a Response to Defendants’ Objection. Docket No. 280. Page 1 of 2 Initials of Deputy Clerk sr