Case ID: f-appx_710/html/0783-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Harrison Benjamin KINNEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NOB HILL GRILL; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 17-15255
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted February 6, 2018  San Francisco, California
    Filed February 9, 2018
    Thomas E. Frankovich, Attorney, The Frankovich Group, Chico, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant
    Ryan Patrick, Attorney, Andrew Wiegel, Attorney, Wiegel Law Group, PLC, San Francisco, CA, for Defendant-Appellee
    Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and D.W. NELSON and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Harrison Kinney appeals the district court’s grant against him of judgment on the pleadings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm in part and dismiss in part.

Plaintiffs claim for prospective injunc-tive relief under the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et. seq., became moot when the restaurant closed.

Given the absence of any available relief under federal law, the district court did not abuse its. discretion in declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiffs state-law claims. 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3); City of Colton v. American Promotional Events, Inc.-West, 614 F.3d 998, 1008 (9th Cir. 2010).

Given our resolution of this appeal, we need not decide any other question presented by this case.

All pending motions are denied as moot.

AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.