Case law

Beau Crigler v. Smith Power Products, Inc., Jeff Eaton, and John De La Hunt

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

If only a portion of the material on a page qualifies for 9 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) 10 (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). … If only a 20 portion of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 21 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings 22 in the margins).

ROBINSON PHARMA, INC. v. REBALANCE HEALTH, INC. and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive

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

The parties’ mere designation 19 of Disclosure or Discovery Material as CONFIDENTIAL or HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL 20 – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY does not—without the submission of competent evidence 21 by declaration, establishing … If only a portion 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).

J. R. v. COLA

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

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 23 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the 24 … This provision is not intended to modify 7 whatever procedure may be established in an e-discovery order that provides for 8

Daniel Lawson v. C A O N U G N EL T E Y S O P F O L L O IC S E A D N E G P E A L R E T S M , L E O N S T , S O T R I D P E U R L ATED PROTECTIVE C A I G T U Y I L O A F R L O (# S 4 4 A 0 N 38 G ) E , O L F E F S I , C O E F R F ICER R in U cl E us L i A ve S , (#44715), and DOES 1 - 40

District Court, C.D. California · Aug 14, 2026

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

In Re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Lit.

821 F. Supp. 2d 1135 · District Court, C.D. California · Sep 29, 2011

Student Registration qualifies as prior art to ... the '120 patent. … The Federal Circuit said that "Student Registration clearly discloses the `cue suppression' decision. In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Litigation, 639 F.3d 1303, 1323 (Fed.Cir.2011).

Provencher v. Dell, Inc.

409 F. Supp. 2d 1196 · District Court, C.D. California · Jan 3, 2006

Discover Bank, by design, was granting itself both a license to push the boundaries of good business practices to their furthest limits and immunity from any wrongdoing. … Clearly, arbitration before the NAF is an inexpensive, efficient, and convenient method for Mr. Provencher to resolve his disputes with Dell.

Grosz v. Boeing Co.

455 F. Supp. 2d 1033 · District Court, C.D. California · Oct 2, 2006

This language clearly indicates that Boeing has the authority to select and define the relevant group from which employees will be laid off. … RETALIATION To establish a prima facie retaliation claim under Title VII, Ms.

Charles N Belssner v. Circle Dental

District Court, C.D. California · May 21, 2020

Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11 (1991) (explaining judicial immunity is 16 immunity from suit, not just from the ultimate assessment of damages). 17 This is true even if his actions were done maliciously or in excess … Thus, there is clearly no merit to Plaintiff’s suit.

MODERN FLOOR SPECIALISTS, INC. et al. v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES et al.

District Court, C.D. California · Apr 3, 2026

However, 16 Plaintiffs cannot establish this probability because Plaintiffs’ state law claims are all 17 barred by California’s litigation privilege. 18 California’s litigation privilege … Properly construed, Rule 11 26 sanctions are “an extraordinary remedy” reserved for “the rare and exceptional case 27 where the action is clearly frivolous, legally unreasonable or without legal foundation, 28 or brought

BDC/Anaheim, LLC v. RB Anaheim Management, LLC

District Court, C.D. California · Apr 4, 2024

Designations 12 that are shown to be clearly unjustified or that have been made for an improper purpose 13 (e.g., to unnecessarily encumber or retard the case development process or to impose 14 unnecessary expenses … 23 Order must be clearly so designated before the material is disclosed or produced. 24 Designation in conformity with this Order requires: 25 (a) for information in documentary form (e.g.,

SHLA GROUP INC., PARK 2580, INC. v. KISSLER AND CO

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

If only a portion of the 20 material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 21 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 22 appropriate … If only a portion of the material on a page qualifies 9 for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the 10 protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the

Amber Medina v. DIRECTV, LLC; Credence Resource Management, LLC; and I.C. System, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California · Jun 25, 2026

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 5 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the 6 protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the 7 margins … This 5 provision is not intended to modify whatever procedure may be 6 established in an e-discovery order that provides for production without 7 prior privilege review.

ERIC J. TROUTMAN and TROUTMAN AMIN, LLP v.

District Court, C.D. California · Jun 15, 2026

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

Fenix International Limited v. Casey Olbrantz; Giorgio Traini

District Court, C.D. California · Jun 3, 2026

If only a portion 2 or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 3 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings 4 in the margins). … If only a 14 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing 15 Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate 16 markings in the margins).

Joseph Mason, individually and on behalf of all similarly situated v. Werner Enterprises, Inc.; a Nebraska corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive

District Court, C.D. California · May 22, 2026

Except as otherwise provided in this 2 Order, or as otherwise stipulated or ordered, Disclosure or Discovery Material that qualifies 3 for protection under this Order must be clearly so designated before the … If only a 10 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party 11 also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in 12 the margins

Vadim Stanley Miesegaes v. Department of State Hospitals - Atascadero

District Court, C.D. California · Aug 6, 2020

immunity on Plaintiff’s procedural due process claim. … Plaintiff 21 does not point to any Supreme Court or binding Ninth Circuit case that clearly 22 establishes the liberty interest alleged by Plaintiff for his procedural due process 23 claim.

Pablo Canales v. NBCUniversal Media, LLC and Does 1 through 100, Inclusive

District Court, C.D. California · May 22, 2026

If only a 4 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing 5 Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 6 appropriate markings in the margins). … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies 17 for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 18 portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).

Cleotilde Montalvo v. Nissan North America, Inc. and Does 1 through 10, inclusive

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

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 26 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the 27 protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the 28 margins … This 10 provision is not intended to modify whatever procedure may be 11 established in an e-discovery order that provides for production without 12 prior privilege review.

John Doe A.W. v. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

District Court, C.D. California · May 7, 2026

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 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).

Spoon Co., Ltd. v. Go Tuning Unlimited, LLC

District Court, C.D. California · Jun 17, 2026

If only a portion of the material on a page qualifies for 12 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) 13 (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 must clearly identify 25 the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 26 (b) for