1. Gives the court power that is a stretch of article III
2. Lawsuits with at least two claims, where one meets requirements of § 1331 or § 1332 or other statute no matter what.
2.1. The claim that enters no matter what is the anchor claim, the claim attaching is orphan (supplemental) claim (orphan piggy backs anchor)
2.2. Because the two claims cannot occur w/o the other, the orphan claim is an article 3 case or controversy if § 1367 is met
3. Test
3.1. A. Constitutitional Limit
3.1.1. 1. When the two actions are considered as a whole, is the case an article 3 case or controversy ?
3.1.1.1. 2. Gibb's test SCNOOF
3.1.1.1.1. Same
3.1.1.1.2. Common
3.1.1.1.3. Nucleus
3.1.1.1.4. Of
3.1.1.1.5. Operative
3.1.1.1.6. Fact
3.2. B. Diversity Exceptions
3.2.1. 1. Is Anchor claim based on Diversity?
3.2.1.1. Yes, move to 2
3.2.2. 2. Is supplemental claim being asserted by the original plaintiff?
3.2.2.1. Yes, Move to 3
3.2.3. 3. Is supplemental claim being brought against party brought into lawsuit under 14, 19, 20 or 24?
3.2.3.1. Yes, Move to 4
3.2.4. 4. Would it destroy complete diversity?
3.2.4.1. Yes NO FEDERAL POWER TO HEAR CLAIM
3.3. C. Discretionary Factors to Deny Supplemental jurisdiction
3.3.1. Raises a novel or complex issue of state law
3.3.2. State law predominates over the claim over which the district court has original jurisdiction
3.3.3. Exceptional circumstances with compelling reasons to decline
3.3.4. District court has dismissed all claims over which it has original jurisdiction (anchor claim dismissed)