Case Name: Mari OTTO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret M. HECKLER, Secy., Department of Health & Human Services, Defendant, Howard Jacobson, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1986-10-14
Citations: 802 F.2d 337
Docket Number: No. 84-6563
Parties: Mari OTTO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret M. HECKLER, Secy., Department of Health & Human Services, Defendant, Howard Jacobson, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 802
Pages: 337–338

Head Matter:
Mari OTTO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret M. HECKLER, Secy., Department of Health & Human Services, Defendant, Howard Jacobson, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 84-6563.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Oct. 14, 1986.
Before MERRILL, TANG and BOOCHEVER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
ORDER AMENDING OPINION
The opinion issued January 28, 1986 is amended as follows:
Delete the last two sentences and substitute:
Retention of jurisdiction over the pendent state claims is a matter for the district court's discretion. Rosado v. Wyman, 397 U.S. 397, 403-05, 90 S.Ct. 1207, 1213-14, 25 L.Ed.2d 442 (1970). The usual rule is that state claims should be dismissed if the federal claims are dismissed before trial. United Mine Workers v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715, 726, 86 S.Ct. 1130, 1139, 16 L.Ed.2d 218 (1966); Jason v. Fonda, 698 F.2d 966, 967 (9th Cir.1982); Wren v. Sletten Construction Co., 654 F.2d 529, 536 (9th Cir.1981). The district court, of course, has the discretion to determine whether its investment of judicial energy justifies retention of jurisdiction, Rosado, 397 U.S. at 403, 90 S.Ct. at 1213, or if it should more properly dismiss the claims without prejudice.