173151P.pdf   09/10/2018  Zach Hillesheim  v.  Holiday Stationstores, Inc.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  17-3151
                          and No:  17-3186
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis   
   [PUBLISHED] [Stras, Author, with Wollman and Arnold, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Americans with Disabilities Act. Plaintiff brought this ADA 
   and Minnesota Human Rights Action in state court alleging defendant had 
   denied him full and equal access to a place of public accommodation by 
   failing to provide a compliant handicap-accessible parking space at one of 
   its stores; the matter was removed to federal court and defendant moved 
   for summary judgment based on remediation of the violation; defendant's 
   Rule 26 violation concerning disclosure of the renovation was harmless; 
   the district court properly found the renovation made the ADA claim moot; 
   however, the district court erred in dismissing the claim, becausethe 
   proper procedure to be followed when a federal court lacks subject-matter 
   jurisdiction over a a removed claim is to remand the claim to state court; 
   therefore, the district court's judgment dismissing the ADA claim is 
   vacated with directions to remand the claim to state court; similarly, the 
   portion of the judgment dismissing plaintiff's claim for injunctive relief 
   under the Minnesota Human Rights Act must also be vacated and remanded to 
   state; plaintiff's claim for damages under the MHRA is not moot and the 
   district court, on remand, should determine whether it wishes to exercise 
   supplemental jurisdiction over this one remaining claim.