T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T HE I DI AMAY A, P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. J A S O N J O H N V A N B E E K ; e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 10- 55538 D . C. N o . 8 : 0 9 - c v - 0 0 7 4 9 - CJ C- SS ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e C e n tr a l D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia C orm a c J . C a rne y , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d M a r c h 12, 2013 ** B e f o r e : P R E G E R S O N , R E I N H A R D T , a n dW . F L E T C H E R , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . H ei di A m ay a app ea l s pro se fr om the di stri ctcourt ’ s orderre m andi ng her ac t i on t o the C al i forni a s t at e c ou rt s a ft erdecl i ni ng t o exerci se supp l em ent al j ur i s di c t i on ove rhe rs e c ond a m e nde d c om pl a i ntunde r28 U . S . C . § 1367. W e ha ve 

# FI LED MA R 21 2013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 55538 2 j ur i s di c t i on unde r28 U . S . C . § 1291. W e r e vi e w f ora n abus e of

di s c r e t i on a d is tr ic t c o u rt’s d e c is io n to d e c lin e s up p le m e n ta l ju r is d ic tio n . W a s h . S ta te R e publ i c an P ar t

yv . W as h. State G r ange , 6 7 6 F .3 d7 8 4 , 7 9 7 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 1 2 ) . W e have a s peci alob l i gat i on t o sat i sf y ourse l ves of the di stri ctcourt ’ s s ubj ec tm att er ju r is d ic tio n . Stee l

C o. v. C i t i

ze ns f or a B etterE nv’t , 5 2 3 U .S . 8 3 , 9 5 ( 1 9 9 8 ) . W e va c a t e a nd r e m a nd. R em an do f A m ay a’s a ctio n to state c o u rt w as re q u ired b ec au se A m ay a’s or i gi na l c om pl a i ntpr ovi de d no ba s i s f orf e de r a l s ubj e c tm a tt e rj ur i s di c t i on, m a ki ng r e m o v a l im p r o p e r . See 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 4 4 1 ( a ) ; se e al so Sp arta Surgi cal

C orp. v. N at ’l A ss ’n of Sec. D ealer

s, Inc. , 159 F . 3d 1209, 1213 ( 9th C i r . 1998) ( “ [ J ] ur i s di c t i on m us tbe a na l y z e d on the ba s i s of the pl e a di ngs f

i l e d a tthe t i m e of re m ov alw i tho utre fe re nce t o sub se qu entam endm ent s. ”) ; R a in s v . Cr ite r io n S ys ., Inc. , 80 F . 3d 339, 346 ( 9th C i r . 1996) ( “ W he n ac l a i m c a n be s upport e d by a l t e rna t i ve a nd i nde pe nde ntthe or i e s — one of w hi c h i s as t a t e l a w the orya nd one of w hi ch i s afe dera l l aw theory— fe dera l qu es t i on j uri sdi ct i on do es no tatt ac h b e c au s e f

e d e r a l l a w i s n o tan e c e s s a rye l e m e n to f th e c l a i m . ” ) . Ac c o r d i n g l y , we v acat e an drem an dw i th i n stru ct i o n s fo r th e d i stri ctco u rtt o v acat e i t s p ri o r o rd ers, a n dto r e m a n dth e a c tio n to s ta te c o u rt.10- 55538 3 T h e p a rtie s s h a ll b e a rth e iro w n c o s ts o n ap p e a l. V AC AT E D a n d RE MAND E D.