Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-00472/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-00472-5/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Fernando Gastelum
Plaintiff
Hie River Park LLC
Defendant
Holiday Inn Express Fresno Riverpark
Defendant

Document Text:

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FERNANDO GASTELUM,

Plaintiff,

v.

HIE RIVER PARK LLC, dba Holiday Inn 

Express Fresno Riverpark,

Defendant.

No. 1:23-cv-00472-JLT-SKO

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS TO STRIKE 

PLAINTIFF’S DIVERSITY 

ALLEGATIONS AND DECLINE 

SUPPLEMENTAL JURISDICTION OVER 

PLAINTIFF’S STATE LAW CLAIMS

(Doc. 12)

Plaintiff Fernando Gastelum (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, 

initiated this action against Defendant Hie River Park LLC, doing business as Holiday Inn 

Express Fresno Riverpark. (Docs. 1, 4.) Following an order to show cause, on August 30, 2023, 

the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations recommending that the Court 

decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state law claims and that those 

claims be dismissed, without prejudice, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(4). (Doc. 12.) The 

assigned magistrate judge also recommended that the diversity allegations contained in Plaintiff’s 

operative complaint be stricken pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f). (Id.)

The findings and recommendations were served on Plaintiff and contained notice that any 

objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service. (Doc. 12 at 10.) No 

objections have been filed, and the time in which to do so has passed. (See Docket.)

Case 1:23-cv-00472-JLT-SKO Document 13 Filed 09/20/23 Page 1 of 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

2

According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c) and Britt v. Simi Valley United School Dist., 708 F.2d 

452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983), the Court conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully 

reviewed the matter, the Court finds that the findings and recommendations are supported by the 

record and proper analysis. Based upon the foregoing, the Court ORDERS:

1. The findings and recommendations issued on August 30, 2023 (Doc. 12) are 

ADOPTED IN FULL.

2. The diversity allegations contained in Plaintiff’s operative complaint (Doc. 7) are 

STRICKEN pursuant to Rule 12(f).

3. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(4) and Vo v. Choi, 49 F.4th 1167 (9th Cir. 2022), 

the Court DECLINES to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s claims 

under California’s Unruh Act and Disabled Persons Act.

4. Plaintiff’s Unruh Act and Disabled Persons Act claims are DISMISSED without 

prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(4).

5. This matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 20, 2023 

Case 1:23-cv-00472-JLT-SKO Document 13 Filed 09/20/23 Page 2 of 2