What is the effect of Exxon on federal subject matter jurisdiction in cases of incomplete diversity?

The correct answer highlights that Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Services, Inc. established an important principle related to supplemental jurisdiction under § 1367(b) in the context of incomplete diversity. In this case, the Supreme Court clarified that if at least one claim in a case is within the original jurisdiction of the federal courts, supplemental jurisdiction can extend to additional claims that do not independently qualify for federal jurisdiction, even when there is incomplete diversity among the parties.

This means that as long as there is at least one claim that satisfies the requirement for federal subject matter jurisdiction (such as a federal question or complete diversity), the court may exercise supplemental jurisdiction over other claims that do not meet these requirements, assuming those claims are part of the same case or controversy. This effectively creates an exception to the limitation found in § 1367(b), which generally restricts supplemental jurisdiction over claims by plaintiffs against certain defendants when the basis is diversity of citizenship.

The options that do not align with this understanding reflect misconceptions about the application of federal jurisdiction. For instance, a statement suggesting that there is no federal jurisdiction in any jurisdiction claim overlooks the nuanced framework provided by the Exxon's ruling. Similarly, the idea that Exxon's decision allows for claims from any