Case law

Amber Widby v. County of Los Angeles, Eli Vera, Angela Carrasco, and Does 1-20, inclusive

District Court, C.D. California · Jan 16, 2026

If only 27 a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the 1 Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by 2 making appropriate markings in the margins … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 14 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the 15 protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).

Keith Feder, M.D., Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California · Mar 10, 2025

without the submission of competent evidence by declaration, 22 establishing … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 12 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify 13

United States v. Acorn Engineering Co.

221 F.R.D. 530 · District Court, C.D. California · Mar 19, 2004

intervention, which is potentially authorized by section 113(i)’s broad language, is to protect its interest in bringing contribution claims against the settling PRPs. 4 Yet section 113(f) expressly grants settling PRPs immunity … The Beazer Court put it well: This Court finds.. .that Beazer 13 does not qualify as a person who has a right to intervene under section 113(i) of CERC-LA.

L.J. a minor, individually and as personal representative of the Estate of Rhaquan Johnson, by her mother and guardian ad litem Mia Tafoya, K.J. a minor, individually and as personal representative of the Estate of Rhaquan Johnson v. United States

District Court, C.D. California · Jan 9, 2026

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for 2200 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected … This provision is not intended to modify 1155 whatever procedure may be established in an e-discovery order that provides 1166

T.B. v. G6 Hospitality Property LLC

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

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

Christian Waters v. Lockheed Martin Corporation

District Court, C.D. California · Feb 5, 2025

If only a portion or portions of the 25 material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party 26 also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by 27 … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 13 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 14 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate

Daimon McGuire v. The City of Los Angeles

District Court, C.D. California · Jun 5, 2025

If only a 15 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party 16 also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings 17 in the margins … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 27 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 1 (b) for testimony given in depositions that the Designating

Edwards Lifesciences Corporation v. Abbott Cardiovascular Systems, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California · Sep 17, 2019

The parties’ 23 mere designation of Exchanged Information as Confidential Information does not— 24 without the submission of competent evidence by declaration, establishing that the 25 material sought to be filed … Nothing herein shall prevent the receiving party from challenging the 3 propriety of the attorney-client privilege or work-product immunity or other 4 applicable privilege or immunity designation by submitting

Nano Foundation, Ltd. v. David C. Silver

District Court, C.D. California · Nov 13, 2019

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). … If only a 23|| portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate 25|| markings in the margins

Luis Enrique Aguilera Angeles v. County of Los Angeles

District Court, C.D. California · Mar 25, 2025

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 27 28 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected … Receiving Parties are those set forth in Federal Rule of Civil 28 2 may be established

Hernandez

District Court, C.D. California · Apr 13, 2026

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

Fox Broadcasting Co. v. Dish Network, L.C.C.

905 F. Supp. 2d 1088 · District Court, C.D. California · Nov 7, 2012

To establish liability on a derivative-infringement theory, then, Fox must first establish that “there has been a direct infringement by third parties.” See Perfect 10, Inc. v. … As the Cablevision court noted, “Sony warns us that ‘the lines between direct infringement, contributory infringement, and vicarious liability are not clearly drawn.’ ” 536 F.3d at 133 (quoting Sony, 464 U.S. at 435 n. 17

Joseph Ward-Wallace v. Los Angeles Police Department; City of Los Angeles; Joshua Sportiello; Edward Pedroza

District Court, C.D. California · Nov 20, 2025

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). … of privilege or other protection, the obligations of 10 the Receiving Parties are those set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(5)(B). 11 This provision is not intended to modify whatever procedure may be established

U.S. Legal Support, Inc. v. Michelle Beverly

District Court, C.D. California · Mar 25, 2025

for protection under this Protective Order must be clearly so designated 22 before the material is disclosed or produced. … If 2 only a portion of the material on a document page qualifies for 3 protection, the Designating Party must also clearly identify the protected 4 portion(s) (e.g. by making

Regina Haro v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals

District Court, C.D. California · Sep 3, 2020

This immunity is broad. … During the effective period of a declaration under subsection (b), or at any time with respect to conduct undertaken in accordance with such declaration, no State or political subdivision of a State may establish

Daimon McGuire v. City of Los Angeles

District Court, C.D. California · Jun 5, 2025

If only a 15 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party 16 also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings 17 in the margins … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 27 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 1 (b) for testimony given in depositions that the Designating

Dow Jones Co. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

219 F.R.D. 167 · District Court, C.D. California · Sep 16, 2003

In response, plaintiffs argue that the public interest in the disclosure of the appendix clearly outweighs the privacy interests of the individuals involved. Plaintiffs’ Mot. at 19-20. … [while] [information relating to business judgments and relationships does not qualify for exemption.” Washington Post, 863 F.2d at 100 (citations omitted).

Quevedo v. MACY'S, INC.

798 F. Supp. 2d 1122 · District Court, C.D. California · Jun 16, 2011

—establishes only that a party does not assent to a contract “when the writing does not appear to be a contract and the terms are not called to the attention of the recipient.” Metters v. … This qualifies as an “employment-related legal dispute” covered by the arbitration agreement. (See Noeth Decl., Ex. B at 37.)

William Christopher Thompson v. Marriott Hotel Services, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California · Sep 11, 2019

If only a portion of the material on a page qualifies for 13 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) 14 ||(e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). … If only a portion of the 24 material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 25 ||identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the 26 margins).

Ratliff v. Hedgepeth

712 F. Supp. 2d 1038 · District Court, C.D. California · May 4, 2010

Thus, the California Supreme Court’s denial of Ground One *1058 is neither contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law. Id.; Carey v. … Thus, the California Supreme Court’s denial of Ground Eight was neither contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law.