Case law

Leeyonnie Hernandez v. County of Riverside

District Court, C.D. California · Feb 22, 2023

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 10 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 11 portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins) … If only a portion or portions of the 21 material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 22 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the

Benjamin Woodhouse v. The United States Government

District Court, C.D. California · May 2, 2022

Moreover, on March 2, 2022, on the basis of judicial immunity or qualified immunity, respectively, the Court dismissed the case as to individual defendants the Hon. Stanley Blumenfeld Jr., the Hon. R. … Plaintiff has not met its burden of establishing that diversity jurisdiction exists. Alphabet is a citizen of California, and although plaintiff contends that Woodhouse and Havensight Capital are citizens of the U.S.

Oscar Corona v. City of Fontana

District Court, C.D. California · Jun 7, 2022

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 … 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

National Resources Defense Council v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

437 F. Supp. 2d 1137 · District Court, C.D. California · Jun 27, 2006

“The courts are not at liberty to pick and choose among congressional enactments, and when two statutes are capable of coexistence, it is the duty of the courts, absent a clearly expressed, congressional intention to the … Nor does it seem likely that Congress qualified the EPA’s duty to promulgate effluent guidelines and standards by silently granting the Agency discretion to remove a category from a section 1314(m) plan once the source has

Marion Martinez v. West Hills Hospital, et al.

District Court, C.D. California · Oct 24, 2025

8 Federal courts are presumed to “lack jurisdiction unless the contrary appears 9 affirmatively from the record;” therefore, the party seeking federal jurisdiction bears 10 the burden of establishing … June 13, 2022) (“receipt of the summary judgment opposition … clearly qualifies as an ‘other paper[.]’”). 24

Tacori Enterprises v. Beverlly Jewellery Co.

253 F.R.D. 577 · District Court, C.D. California · Sep 17, 2008

Lee for the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition no later than August 8, 2008, 6 and the latter failure clearly *583 prejudices plaintiff by preventing it from preparing its case. … Tacorian’s clarifying declaration, however, his qualified deposition testimony does not prove—as Rego argues— that Mr. Kroll misrepresented anything.

Shayne Wallace v. Louis Dejoy

District Court, C.D. California · Apr 13, 2023

E, at 00011, ECF No. 28-1. 12 Plaintiff’s allegations that are not clearly time-barred 13 will only be deemed timely if they fall within these 14 four discrete events … To 2 establish discrimination on the basis of disability, a 3 plaintiff must show that (1) she is disabled under the 4 Act; (2) she is otherwise qualified; and (3) she

Albert Ramos v. Navient Corporation et al.

District Court, C.D. California · May 29, 2026

Before the meeting, Defendants shall provide Plaintiff the evidence they contend establishes that Navient Corporation is not involved in the conduct alleged in the complaint. … Plaintiff’s invocation of judicial estoppel likewise fails because it is predicated on the faulty assertion that these positions are clearly inconsistent.

Hassanati v. International Lease Finance Corp.

51 F. Supp. 3d 887 · District Court, C.D. California · Feb 18, 2014

The removal and appointment of a personal representative clearly would interfere with the administration of the estate”); Coleman v. … ODC argues before this Court that unpublished decisions can be considered in determining whether the law was clearly established. We agree”). . Order at 18-20 (emphasis added). .

Chase Hamano v. Activision Blizzard, Inc.

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

CONFIDENTIAL does not – without the submission of competent evidence by 21 declaration, establishing … Designations 4 that are shown to be clearly unjustified or that have been made for an improper 5 purpose (e.g., to unnecessarily encumber the case development process or to impose 6 unnecessary expenses and burdens

Matter of Kevork

634 F. Supp. 1002 · District Court, C.D. California · Aug 7, 1985

The information must be sought from an agent of a foreign power, and the government must meet the standard of probable cause to establish that. … Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court are sitting district court judges, fully qualified to make these determinations. The certification process does not negate these requirements of FISA. See United States v.

Anna Glowa v. MDR L&M Apartments, LLC et al

District Court, C.D. California · Nov 14, 2025

As an initial matter, the Court finds that the Document Production qualifies as an “other paper” under § 1446(b)(3). … Courts in the Ninth Circuit have found that unverified discovery responses and other informal communications qualify as “other paper[s].”

Samica Enterprises, LLC v. Mail Boxes Etc. USA, Inc.

637 F. Supp. 2d 712 · District Court, C.D. California · Dec 22, 2008

Clearly, Plaintiffs’ claim is sufficiently “related to price,” and is subject to preemption. 49 U.S.C. § 14501 (c)(1). … The second clause merely qualifies the first by assuring “the [continuing] vitality *722 of ‘those claims that are not expressly preempted.’ ” Cortez v.

Connie Dietrich v. Autozone West, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California · Oct 28, 2019

It asserted government contractor and sovereign immunity defenses: 39. … Hammond [the case establishing the injunction] long before the removal notices were filed.” /d.

Purex Corp., Ltd. v. Procter & Gamble Co.

419 F. Supp. 931 · District Court, C.D. California · Jul 23, 1976

Over the years, Clorox hired several other employees from Procter to fill assignments for which their well-established skills uniquely qualified them. … The fact that such activity was seriously harmful to sales of Purex branded bleach is clearly established in the record.

Cook Family Foods, Ltd. v. Voss

781 F. Supp. 1458 · District Court, C.D. California · Jul 15, 1991

The Supreme Court noted that a statute is “void for vagueness if its prohibitions are not clearly defined.” Grayned v. Rockford, 408 U.S. 104 , 108, 92 S.Ct. 2294, 2298 , 33 L.Ed.2d 222 (1972). … The statement shall not include any term qualifying a unit of weight, measure, or count such as “jumbo quart,” “full gallon,” “giant quart,” "when packed,” “minimum,” or words of similar importance.

Western States Wholesale, Inc. v. Synthetic Industries, Inc.

206 F.R.D. 271 · District Court, C.D. California · Feb 19, 2002

The Ninth Circuit justifies the presumption of consumer deception because “[i]t is not easy to establish actual consumer deception through direct evidence. … The reason for the presumption is to ease the burden of proof because of the difficulty of establishing actual deception.

United States Ex Rel. Truong v. Northrop Corp.

728 F. Supp. 615 · District Court, C.D. California · Aug 11, 1989

They enjoy limited powers, have no formal duties, hold no established office, have no prescribed tenure, and receive no federal emoluments. … The first, the potential denial of the statutory bounty, cannot qualify as injury in fact since there is no entitlement to the award.

In Re Computer Sciences Corp. Erisa Litigation

635 F. Supp. 2d 1128 · District Court, C.D. California · Jul 13, 2009

The rationale behind this presumption is that “employee stock ownership plans are designed to invest primarily in qualifying employer securities” ( 29 U.S.C. § 1107 (d)(6)(A)), because they are “devices for expanding the … The Court rejects Plaintiffs’ interpretation of the “substance” of the newsletter, especially in light of the fact that it clearly states that “the views expressed in this commentary are the views of Christopher Probyn, Ph.D

Marlon Mayo v. Aspire Bakeries, LLC., a Delaware Corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive

District Court, C.D. California · Jul 6, 2026

Mayo’s statements in prior litigation about the CBA’s grievance process do not establish either prong of the test. … Those questions include determining what an “occurrence” is under the CBA, when an absence qualifies as paid sick leave, how the rolling twelve-month lookback is calculated, whether Mayo’s absences were