Gilbert v. Doctor's Choice Modesto LLC

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: October 4, 2024
• Docket: 1:21-cv-00690
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 1] Darren Gilbert, No. 1:21-cv-00690-KJM-JDP 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. 14 Doctor’s Choice Modesto LLC, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Darren Gilbert filed this civil rights action seeking relief under the Americans 18 | with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101, et seg. (ADA), California’s Unruh Civil 19 | Rights Act, Cal. Civ. Code §§ 51 et seg., and violations of California Health and Safety Code 20 | § 19955(a). See generally Second Am. Compl, ECF No. 70. Specifically, plaintiff sought 21 | injunctive relief, damages, attorneys’ fees and costs. Jd. The court subsequently declined to 22 | exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims and dismissed those claims with 23 | prejudice. See Prior Order (Apr. 21, 2023), ECF No. 119. Only the ADA claim remains. 24 Plaintiffs counsel recently filed a declaration informing the court plaintiff and □□□□□□□□□□ 25 | wife passed away. See Decl. ¥ 2, ECF No. 157. As plaintiff's counsel concedes, see id. □ 3, 26 | injunctive relief is the only remedy available to a private litigant under Title III of the ADA. See 27 | Wander v. Kaus, 304 F.3d 856, 858 (9th Cir. 2002). Plaintiff's death renders his ADA claim 28 | moot thereby depriving this court of subject matter jurisdiction. See, e.g., Gilbert v. De Aranjah

1 | Inc., No. 22-00994, 2024 WL 3673528, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 5, 2024) (finding the same). 2 | Having determined subject matter is lacking, the court dismisses this action without prejudice and 3 | directs the Clerk of Court to close this case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3). 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 | DATED: October 3, 2024. oUt 6 = 4 Y ees , STATES DISTRICT JUDGE