When can a federal court dismiss a request for supplemental jurisdiction?

The correct answer is predicated on the functioning of supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367. A federal court may choose to dismiss a request for supplemental jurisdiction when the state law claim is so dominant that it effectively overshadows the original jurisdiction claims, often creating a situation where the federal interests are minimal. In these cases, the court may determine it is more appropriate to let the state claim be decided by a state court, especially if the federal claims have been resolved, or if they are dismissed.

The dominant state law claim scenario can arise when the supplemental claim is substantially related to the main federal claim but does not warrant federal review due to the lack of federal interest or the complexity of state law issues. The statutory language reflects the notion that federal courts should avoid further exercises of jurisdiction that could lead to inefficient use of judicial resources or result in the adjudication of complex state law issues outside of their original intended jurisdiction.

In this context, it becomes clear that dismissing a request for supplemental jurisdiction based on the dominance of a state law claim is in line with the goals of judicial economy and respect for state law authority.