Case Name: George James FIORENTINO, Appellant, v. Bill VANDERBILT, Investigator, Anoka County Sheriff's Department; David Toth, Detective, Spring Lake Park Police Department; Michael Commerford, Drug Enforcement Agency, Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-04-11
Citations: 8 F. App'x 572
Docket Number: No. 00-2520
Parties: George James FIORENTINO, Appellant, v. Bill VANDERBILT, Investigator, Anoka County Sheriff's Department; David Toth, Detective, Spring Lake Park Police Department; Michael Commerford, Drug Enforcement Agency, Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 8
Pages: 572–572

Head Matter:
George James FIORENTINO, Appellant, v. Bill VANDERBILT, Investigator, Anoka County Sheriff's Department; David Toth, Detective, Spring Lake Park Police Department; Michael Commerford, Drug Enforcement Agency, Appellees.
No. 00-2520.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted April 6, 2001.
Filed April 11, 2001.
Before MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and FAGG, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
George James Fiorentino appeals the district court's Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) dismissal of Fiorentino's action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), and state law. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties' briefs, we conclude Fiorentino failed to state any claims on which relief could be granted. See Phillips v. Ford Motor Co., 83 F.3d 235, 239 (8th Cir.1996) (standard of review). We also conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Fiorentino's state law claims, see 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3), but the dismissal of these claims should be without prejudice, see Franklin v. Zain, 152 F.3d 783, 786 (8th Cir.1998). We thus affirm the judgment but modify the dismissal of the pendent state claims to be without prejudice. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.