As it approached the runway at an airport, a plane struck electrical wires and crashed. An injured passenger filed an action in federal district court against the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") under the Federal Tort Claims Act, alleging that the FAA was negligent in operating runway lights and performing its air traffic control functions. The passenger seeks to join in that action a state law negligence claim against the utility company that erected the power lines, alleging negligent placement of the lines. Both claims seek $1 million for the passenger's injuries. The passenger is a citizen of State A. The utility company is a State A corporation and all its offices and operations are in State A.Does the federal court have subject matter jurisdiction over the passenger's claim against the utility company?
(A) No, because the claim is a state law claim between two citizens of the same state.
(B) No, because, while the two claims arise from the same event and same injuries, supplemental jurisdiction does not extend to claims against a different party.
(C) Yes, because the court has supplemental jurisdiction over the passenger's claim against the utility company.
(D) Yes, because a plaintiff may join in an action all claims that he has against a particular defendant.

Civil procedure is the body of law that sets out the rules and standards that courts follow when adjudicating civil lawsuits (as opposed to procedures in criminal law matters). This claim against the FAA comes under federal law because it was brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Once a claim satisfies the requirements for original federal subject matter jurisdiction, the court has discretion to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over related claims that derive from the same common nucleus of fact and are such that a plaintiff would ordinarily be expected to try them in a single judicial proceeding.