Case law

Deepa Patel v. City of Stanton

District Court, C.D. California · Aug 26, 2024

Fourteenth Amendment Privileges and Immunities Claim The Fourteenth Amendment provides that “[n]o State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States … Defendant argues that (1) the Court lacks jurisdiction over these writ claims, which should be brought to California Superior Court; (2) the claims do not qualify for supplemental jurisdiction because they are not part

Abelina Perez v. County of Riverside

District Court, C.D. California · Jul 13, 2022

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 20 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 21 portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). … If only a portion or portions of 3 the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 4 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the

Nestle USA, Inc. v. Wells International Marketing Group, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California · Aug 12, 2019

If only a portion of the material on a page qualifies for 26 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) 27 (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). … If only a 10 portion of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 11 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings 12 in the margins).

Benebone LLC v. Pet Qwerks, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California · Jan 11, 2021

If only a portion or portions of the material on a 14 page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the 15 protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 16 … If only a 26 portion of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 27 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate 28 markings in the margins).

Classic Concepts, Inc. v. Bungalow Five, LLC

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

If only a portion or 4 portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 5 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings 6 in the margins … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies 18 for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) 19 (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).

Brasserie De Tahiti v. Oceandless Design, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California · Mar 21, 2023

If only a portion or 2266 portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 2277 2288 … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for 1111 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 1122 appropriate markings in the margins

Carter Hawley Hale Stores, Inc. v. Limited, Inc.

587 F. Supp. 246 · District Court, C.D. California · Apr 27, 1984

The Clayton Act clearly provides that recovery thereunder is limited to those suffering anticompetitive injury. 720 F.2d at 1183 (emphasis added). Cf. A.D.M. Corp. v. … The burden of proof to establish both relevant markets is on plaintiff. See Gough v. Rossmoor Corp., 585 F.2d 381, 389 (9th Cir.1978) (§ 1 rule of reason case). A.

Sarkhan Nabiyev v. Closet World, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California · Nov 16, 2023

The UCL and FAL require a plaintiff to “(1) establish a loss 18 or deprivation of money or property sufficient to qualify as an injury in fact, i.e., 19 economic injury, and (2) show that economic injury was the result … requirements to establish Article III and 16 California statutory standing.

Independent Ink, Inc. v. Trident, Inc.

210 F. Supp. 2d 1155 · District Court, C.D. California · Jun 3, 2002

Radiology, Ltd., 924 F.2d 1484, 1490 (9th Cir.1991) (court rejected testimony of two witnesses about market definition because there was “no evidence that those two principals were experts qualified to opine on a highly technical … Nor is the geographic market in this case clearly defined as the United States and Canada, as Plaintiff contends and Defendants dispute.

Dogloo, Inc. v. Doskocil Manufacturing Co.

893 F. Supp. 911 · District Court, C.D. California · Apr 14, 1995

This language clearly evidences Doskocil’s license to use Patent No. 4,692,729. … Because paragraph 3 “expressly” grants Contieo a license under Patent No. 4,692,729, Doskocil is clearly licensed to use Patent No. 4,692,729.

United States v. Filomeno Hernandez

District Court, C.D. California · Sep 1, 2020

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

Federal Trade Commission v. Frontier Communications Corporation

District Court, C.D. California · Oct 27, 2021

If only a portion or 3 portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the 4 Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) 5 (e.g., by making appropriate … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 27 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify 28 the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings

Glen Holly Entertainment, Inc. v. Tektronix, Inc.

100 F. Supp. 2d 1073 · District Court, C.D. California · Sep 15, 1999

Antitrust injury is regularly described as “ ‘necessary, but not always sufficient, to establish [antitrust] standing.’ ” American Ad II , quoting Cargill, Inc. v. … Where a plaintiff fails to establish antitrust injury, the Court need not consider the remaining factors for antitrust standing because the plaintiff cannot establish antitrust standing. Florida Seed Co., Inc. v.

Ruthie Braswell v. AHMC San Gabriel Valley Medical Center LP

District Court, C.D. California · Mar 8, 2022

For instance, section 510 establishes a state-directed right to overtime pay, but section 514 clarifies that section 510 does not apply to workers employed under to a qualifying CBA – so if section 510 does not “apply, … If the Court were to grant Plaintiff’s request, it would frustrate the gatekeeping function clearly defined by the Supreme Court.

Edward Licon v. Konica Minolta Business Solutions USA, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California · Jan 18, 2022

If only a portion or portions of 10 the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 11 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the 12 margins … If only a 23 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing 24 Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 25 appropriate markings in the

Zahra Afianian v. Elaine Duke

District Court, C.D. California · Nov 6, 2019

Except as otherwise provided in 25 this Order, or as otherwise stipulated or ordered, Disclosure or Discovery Material 26 that qualifies for protection under this Order must be clearly so designated before 27 … This provision is not intended to modify 27 whatever procedure may be established in an e-discovery order that provides for 28 production without prior privilege review.

T and R Chemicals, Inc. v. Caragum International

District Court, C.D. California · Jan 17, 2024

Designations 8 that are shown to be clearly unjustified or that have been made for an improper purpose 9 (e.g., to unnecessarily encumber the case development process or to impose 10 unnecessary expenses and … 18 Order must be clearly so designated before the material is disclosed or produced. 19 Designation in conformity with this Order requires: 20 (a) for information in documentary form (e.g.,

Vampire Family Brands, LLC v. Treasury wine estates limited

District Court, C.D. California · Mar 4, 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 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) and

Daniel Padilla v. City of Redondo Beach

District Court, C.D. California · Jun 7, 2023

for protection under this Order must be clearly so designated 27 || before the material is disclosed or produced. … 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)

Merkamerica Inc. v. Dell Marketing LP

District Court, C.D. California · Jun 10, 2021

Designations 24 that are shown to be clearly unjustified or that have been made for an improper 25 purpose (e.g., to unnecessarily encumber the case development process or to impose 26 unnecessary expenses and burdens … this Order must be clearly so designated before the material is disclosed or 8 produced. 9 Designation in conformity with this Order requires: