Case Explained: VIJAYRAGHAVAN V. COHAN, ET AL.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-14 Docket: 5:23-cv-00683-SSS-DTB The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Vasu Vijayraghavan’s state law claims against Katherine Cohan. The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing Vijayraghavan’s wrongful arrest claim with prejudice because her operative complaint failed to allege sufficient facts to raise a plausible inference that Cohan’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing her arrest without probable cause, citing *Cox v. Griffin* and *Ashcroft v. Iqbal*. Furthermore, the court found no abuse of discretion in denying Vijayraghavan’s motions to amend, for reconsideration, or to assert additional claims, noting that she failed to comply with local civil rules by not attaching a proposed amended complaint and failing to articulate good cause for untimely filings. Regarding the dismissal of other state-law claims without prejudice, the court determined that any potential error in declining supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) was harmless because the district court permissibly declined to exercise such jurisdiction once all federal claims had been dismissed. Consequently, the judgment of the district court stands, and Vijayraghavan’s appeal is denied with no further relief granted. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.