HARRISON KINNEY V. NOB HILL GRILL, No. 17-15255 (9th Cir. 2018)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 09 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT HARRISON BENJAMIN KINNEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, No. 17-15255 D.C. No. 3:16-cv-03211-CRB v. MEMORANDUM* NOB HILL GRILL; et al., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Charles R. Breyer, District Judge, Presiding Submitted February 6, 2018** San Francisco, California Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and D.W. NELSON and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. Harrison Kinney appeals the district court’s grant against him of judgment on the pleadings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm in part and dismiss in part. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Plaintiff’s claim for prospective injunctive relief under the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et. seq., became moot when the restaurant closed. Given the absence of any available relief under federal law, the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiff’s state-law claims. 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3); City of Colton v. American Promotional Events, Inc.-West, 614 F.3d 998, 1008 (9th Cir. 2010). Given our resolution of this appeal, we need not decide any other question presented by this case. All pending motions are denied as moot. AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.