Synergy Project Management, Inc. v. City and County of San Francisco

Opinion

1 2 3 6 7 SYNERGY PROJECT MANAGEMENT, Case No. 17-cv-06763-JST INC., 8 Plaintiff, ORDER REMANDING CASE 9 v. Re: ECF No. 179 10 CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 11 FRANCISCO, et al., Defendants. 12 13 14 On June 7, 2021, the Ninth Circuit affirmed in part and vacated in part the Court’s orders 15 granting Defendants’ motions to dismiss, denying leave to amend, and entering final judgment. 16 Synergy Project Mgmt., Inc. v. City and County of San Francisco, No. 19-17558, -- Fed. Appx --, 17 2021 WL 2311946, at *1 (9th Cir. June 7, 2021). The Ninth Circuit affirmed this Court’s 18 dismissal of Plaintiff Synergy Project Management, Inc.’s federal claims without leave to amend. 19 Id. at *1-2. As to Synergy’s state law intentional interference claim, the Ninth Circuit 20 acknowledged an intervening California court decision under which Defendant City and County of 21 San Francisco “could potentially be liable under a tortious interference theory,” although “only if 22 Synergy alleged an independently wrongful act” by the City. Id. at *1. It was left to this Court’s 23 discretion “to either address this issue on remand or, because no federal claims will remain, to 24 remand the claim to state court for resolution.” Id. (citing Carnegie-Mellon Univ. v. Cohill, 484 25 U.S. 343, 357 (1988); 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3)). Synergy filed a petition for rehearing and 26 rehearing en banc, which the Ninth Circuit denied, and the mandate issued on July 28, 2021. ECF 27 No. 179. 1 Synergy’s state law intentional interference claim. The case is hereby remanded to San Francisco 2 County Superior Court.

4 Dated: August 4, 2021 5 JON S. TIGA 6 nited States District Judge 7 8 9 10 11 a 12

15 16

it

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28