Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-04452/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-04452-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 362
Nature of Suit: Medical Malpractice
Cause of Action: 28:1402 Medical Malpractice

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY S. FRUCIANO,

Plaintiff,

v.

TOM LUE, M.D., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.18-cv-04452-JSC 

ORDER REMANDING CLAIM

AGAINST DR. KARPMAN AND THE 

UROLOGICAL SURGEONS OF 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA TO THE 

ALAMEDA COUNTY SUPERIOR 

COURT

Re: Dkt. No. 116

Plaintiff Anthony Fruciano representing himself alleges discrimination under the Unruh Act 

and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in connection with medical treatment he sought from three separate health care 

providers in 2016. Although Plaintiff filed this action in the Alameda County Superior Court, the 

University of California Regents, who were previously named as a defendant and employed Dr. Lue, 

another defendant in this action, removed the action to this court based on federal question jurisdiction. 

After several rounds of motion practice, only three defendants remain: Dr. Lue, Dr. Karpman, and Dr. 

Karpman’s employer the Urological Surgeons of Northern California. Plaintiff pleads a Section 1983 

claim against Dr. Lue and an Unruh Act claim against Dr. Karpman and the Urological Surgeons of 

Northern California. Because the Court had concerns regarding its subject matter jurisdiction over the 

state law claim against Dr. Karpman and the Urological Surgeons of Northern California, the parties 

were ordered to show cause as to why the state claim against Dr. Karpman and the Urological 

Surgeons of Northern California should not be remanded to state court. (Dkt. No. 116.) Plaintiff 

responded stating that he does not oppose remand and Dr. Karpman and the Urological Surgeons of 

Northern California have not responded to the Court’s Order. 

The Court SEVERS Plaintiff’s state law claim against Dr. Karpman and the Urological 

Case 3:18-cv-04452-JSC Document 118 Filed 07/16/19 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Surgeons of Northern California and REMANDS the claim to the Alameda Superior Court. See 28 

U.S.C. § 1441(c)(2). While the Court has original jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s Section 1983 claim 

against Dr. Lue, there is no basis for supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state law claim against 

Dr. Karpman and the Urological Surgeons of Northern California because the state law claim does not 

arise out of the same “case or controversy” as Plaintiff’s Section 1983 claim against Dr. Lue. See 28 

U.S.C. § 1367(a). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 16, 2019

JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:18-cv-04452-JSC Document 118 Filed 07/16/19 Page 2 of 2