Case law

California Spine and Neurosurgery Institute v. Sanmina Corporation

District Court, C.D. California · Feb 12, 2024

If only a 17 portion of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 18 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings 19 in the margins). … Then, 27 before producing the specified documents, the Producing Party must affix the 1 portion of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 2 must clearly identify the protected portion

AmTrust Financial Services, Inc. v. Old Republic General Insurance Corporation

District Court, C.D. California · Mar 11, 2025

If only a 7 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing 8 Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 9 appropriate markings in the margins … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies 20 for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 21 portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).

Keith v. Volpe

965 F. Supp. 1337 · District Court, C.D. California · Oct 2, 1996

They submit that this language clearly designates the entire freeway as “landscaped” and thus billboard-free. … To the extent that qualified persons regularly residing in the area are not available; b.

Leonides Enriquez v. City of Long Beach

District Court, C.D. California · Jan 9, 2024

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 3 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 4 portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). … If only a portion or portions 14 of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 15 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the

Jeffrey Paul v. County of Los Angeles

District Court, C.D. California · Mar 12, 2025

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 16 || qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the 17 || protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins) … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for 3 || protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) 4 || (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).

JONNIE MARETTI v. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., a Delaware Corporation; CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS HOLDING COMPANY, LLC, a Delaware Corporation

District Court, C.D. California · Jun 18, 2026

If only a 17 portion of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must 18 clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the 19 margins). … If only a portion of the material on a page qualifies for 2 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by 3 making appropriate markings in the margins).

Fields v. Palmdale School District

271 F. Supp. 2d 1217 · District Court, C.D. California · Jul 18, 2003

upbringing of their children by introducing them to matters of and relating to sex in accordance with their personal and religious values and beliefs, *1221 pursuant to the Constitutionally protected right to privacy,” qualifies … In order state a claim under Section 1983, the Parents must prove that the District (i) violated a “clearly established” statutory or constitutional right, Harlow v.

Narguess Noohi v. Johnson and Johnson Consumer Inc.

District Court, C.D. California · Jun 14, 2021

Qualified Persons With Respect to Confidential Material. … Each redaction in a TIFF-image shall be indicated clearly on the 10 image as being based on “Privilege” or “Other.” 11 ii.

Sean Leonard v. Navy Federal Credit Union; Early Warning Services, LLC

District Court, C.D. California · Jan 8, 2026

If only a portion or portions of 23 the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 24 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 25 appropriate markings in the … This 20 provision is not intended to modify whatever procedure may be 21 established in an e-discovery order that provides for production

LUIS FERNANDO RAMOS ARANDA, individual, and PATRICIA RODRIGUEZ FIGUEROA, an individual v. NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC.

District Court, C.D. California · Apr 27, 2026

If only a portion 3 or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 4 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings 5 in the margins … If only a 15 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing 16 Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate 17 markings in the margins

California Spine and Neurosurgery Institute v. Trimble Inc.

District Court, C.D. California · Feb 20, 2024

If only a 17 portion of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 18 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings 19 in the margins). … Then, 27 before producing the specified documents, the Producing Party must affix the 1 portion of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 2 must clearly identify the protected portion

R. Lance Hill v. Metro Goldwyn Mayer Studios Inc.

District Court, C.D. California · Feb 18, 2025

If only a portion 14 or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party 15 also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate 16 markings in the margins). … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for 27 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) 1 (b) for testimony given in depositions, that the

California Ex Rel. California Department of Toxic Services v. Neville Chemical Co.

213 F. Supp. 2d 1134 · District Court, C.D. California · May 10, 2002

The factual background to this case is set forth in the March 26, 2002 Order. 3 .DTSC objects to the Johnson declaration on the grounds that he is not qualified as an expert. … The Court finds that Johnson is sufficiently qualified by knowledge, skill, experience, training or education to testify as an expert pursuant to Fed.R.Evid. 701. 4 .

Beach District Surgery Center v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.

District Court, C.D. California · Jun 8, 2023

If only a 25 portion of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 26 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings 27 in the margins). … If only a 9 portion of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 10 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings 11 in the margins).

Chunma USA, Inc. v. West American Insurance Company

District Court, C.D. California · Aug 16, 2019

If only a 17 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing 18 Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate 19 markings in the margins … If only a 2 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing 3 Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate 4 markings in the margins

Stacey Wade-James v. Genzyme Corporation

District Court, C.D. California · Feb 7, 2025

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 25 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 26 portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). … If only a 9 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing 10 Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate 11 markings in the margins)

County of Orange v. McGraw Hill Companies, Inc.

245 B.R. 151 · District Court, C.D. California · Mar 18, 1999

Cowles Media Co., 501 U.S. 663, 670 , 111 S.Ct. 2513 , 115 L.Ed.2d 586 (1991)(holding the “publisher of a newspaper has no special immunity from the application of general laws. … This is not enough, standing alone, to establish actual malice: "Failure to investigate before publishing, even when a reasonably prudent person would have done so, does not establish reckless disregard.”

Lawrence v. Life Insurance Co. of North America

144 F. Supp. 3d 1140 · District Court, C.D. California · Nov 12, 2015

Evidence outside the administrative record may only be considered “when circumstances clearly establish that additional evidence is necessary to conduct an adequate de novo review of the benefit decision.” Mongeluzo v. … Johnson does not appear to have used any diagnostic tools to evaluate the psychological symptoms, even assuming that he would be qualified to do so.

Apple Computer, Inc. v. Formula International, Inc.

562 F. Supp. 775 · District Court, C.D. California · Apr 25, 1983

Section 117 specifically preserved the preexisting state of the law as to copyrightability of computer programs without clearly defining what the preexisting law was. … Defendants portray this case as part of an attempt by a large established computer firm to preserve its market position and hinder competition.

Khary Lewis II v. American Express National Bank

District Court, C.D. California · Dec 11, 2025

Except as otherwise provided in 15 this Order, or as otherwise stipulated or ordered, Disclosure of Discovery Material 16 that qualifies for protection under this Order must be clearly so designated before the 17 material … If only a portion of the material on a page qualifies for 11 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) 12 (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).