David B. Triemert v. Washington County

571 F. App'x 509

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Minnesota resident David Triemert appeals the district court’s 1 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint raising claims out of incidents connected with his traffic stop and ensuing arrest. Upon careful de novo review, see Minn. Majority v. Mansky, 708 F.3d 1051, 1055 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. , 134 S.Ct. 824, — L.Ed.2d - (2013), we agree with the district court that dismissal was warranted for the reasons explained in the thorough ruling issued by the court. We also conclude that the district court properly exercised its discretion in declining supplemental jurisdiction over the pendent state-law claims. See Labickas v. Ark. State Univ., 78 F.3d 333, 334-35 (8th Cir.1996) (per curiam) (following dismissal of federal claims, court may dismiss state law claims without prejudice). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

1 . The Honorable Patrick J. Schütz, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Janie S. Mayeron, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.