Case law

United States v. Wayte

549 F. Supp. 1376 · District Court, C.D. California · Nov 15, 1982

The courts have established a two-prong test for establishing a prima facie case. … The Order specifically addressed the Government’s contention that defendant should not receive any of the documents due to the Government’s invocation of a qualified executive privilege.

Martha Ruelas v. Target Corporation

District Court, C.D. California · Dec 1, 2025

If only a 6 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing 7 Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate 8 markings in the margins). … If only a 18 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing 19 Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate 20 markings in the margins

Amber Wilson v. City of Los Angeles

District Court, C.D. California · Nov 1, 2019

If only a portion of the material on a page qualifies for 8 || protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) 9 || (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 10 … If only a 19 || portion of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 20 || must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings 21 || in the margins).

Steven Feckley v. Covance, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California · Nov 5, 2019

If only a 18 || portion of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must 19 || clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the 20 |) margins) … If only a portion of the material on a page 2|| qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 3 || portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).

Gutowitz v. Transamerica Life Insurance

126 F. Supp. 3d 1128 · District Court, C.D. California · Aug 14, 2015

There, the court considered whether a Washington state “boarding home” — that state’s equivalent of a RCFE — qualified as a Nursing Home. Id. … It concluded that the “average insurance buyer would not expect an on-call nurse to provide ‘continuous nursing care,”’ id. and noted that Transamerica clearly did not think on-call nurses provided such care, as it had “suggest

In Re Syncor ERISA Litigation

351 F. Supp. 2d 970 · District Court, C.D. California · Aug 23, 2004

Employee stock ownership plans, a type of EIAP, are designed to invest primarily in qualifying employer securities. 29 U.S.C. § 1107 (d)(6)(A). … However, the Ninth Circuit declined to answer that question definitively, or to establish a different standard. Id.

Madsen v. Associated Chino Teachers

317 F. Supp. 2d 1175 · District Court, C.D. California · Apr 19, 2004

Madsen has “the burden of establishing a prima facie case by showing that (l)[s]he is a member of a protected class, (2)[s]he was qualified for [her] position, (3)[s]he experienced an adverse employment action; and (4) similarly … “[T]o pass muster under the Establishment Clause the law in question first must reflect a clearly secular legislative purpose ..., second, must have a primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion ..., and, third

Meritzel Escamilla v. City of San Bernardino

District Court, C.D. California · Jul 17, 2025

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 15 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 16 portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). … If only a portion or portions 26 of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 27 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the

Cano v. Davis

193 F. Supp. 2d 1177 · District Court, C.D. California · Mar 18, 2002

At that point the law is clear that ‘the Speech or Debate Clause clearly proscribes at least some of the evidence’ ”). See also 26A Charles Alan Wright & Kenneth W. … There, the court rejected the concept that the evidentiary privilege established by the Speech or De *1181 bate Clause protects against use rather than non-disclosure.

Ortega v. Natural Balance, Inc.

300 F.R.D. 422 · District Court, C.D. California · Jun 19, 2014

Marrón and the Weston Firm are qualified and adequate to represent the class in this case. … In re Vioxx Class Cases, 180 Cal.App.4th 116, 129 , 103 Cal.Rptr.3d 83 (2009) (“Causation, on a class-wide basis, may be established by materiality.

Tommy Diaz v. Marc Avent

District Court, C.D. California · May 2, 2023

Even if the 5 evidence that plaintiff’s medical expenses exceeded $90,000 definitively establishes 6 that the delay in his treatment was not caused by the nonmedical concern of financial 7 costs, it in no way establishes … immunity likewise 15 improperly relies on his preferred interpretation of disputed facts.

Youssif Gayed v. 22nd Century Technologies, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California · Oct 26, 2022

If only a portion of the material on a page qualifies _~, 23 ||for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected —_ 24 || portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in … If only a portion of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the 7 || Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 8 || appropriate markings in the

Tarik Smith v. County of Riverside

District Court, C.D. California · Jul 1, 2025

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 5 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 6 portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). … This provision is not intended to modify whatever 18 procedure may be established in an e-discovery order that provides for production 19 without prior privilege review.

Greenmount LLC v. Cleanline Management LLC

District Court, C.D. California · Mar 19, 2025

If only a portion or portions of the 28 1 material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify 2 the protected … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 12 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 13 portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins

Kimberly Marroquin v. Unidentified LAPD Officer

District Court, C.D. California · Feb 1, 2022

If only a portion or portions of the 12 material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 13 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 14 … This provision is not intended to modify whatever procedure 9 may be established in an e-discovery order that provides for production without prior 10 privilege review.

Davies v. Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors

177 F. Supp. 3d 1194 · District Court, C.D. California · Apr 6, 2016

The Federal Establishment Clause The Federal Establishment Clause prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion” or undertaking any act that unduly favors one religion over another. … Establishment Clause inquiry.

Bousquet v. Apfel

118 F. Supp. 2d 1049 · District Court, C.D. California · Oct 30, 2000

A person unable to meet the minimal burden of providing information to establish his continuing eligibility is unlikely to be able to meet the much higher procedural barrier to applying for benefits anew. … Instead, she found that “the medical evidence of record thus does not clearly show that the claimant has stopped using drugs regularly.” [AR 14].

Abdirahman Aden Kariye, et al. v. Markwayne Mullin, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, in his official capacity, et al.

District Court, C.D. California · Mar 31, 2026

If only a 12 portion of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 13 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings 14 in the margins). … This provision is not intended to modify whatever 7 procedure may be established in an e-discovery order that provides for production 8 without prior privilege review.

Mina Boules v. United States of America; Federal Protective Service

District Court, C.D. California · Nov 19, 2024

Except as otherwise provided in 4 this Order, or as otherwise stipulated or ordered, Disclosure of Discovery Material 5 that qualifies for protection under this Order must be clearly so designated before the 6 material … If only a 12 portion of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 13 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings 14 in the margins).

Seth Gordon v. Create Music Group, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California · Jan 4, 2022

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 21 || qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 22 || 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 4 || protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) 5 || (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins)