Case law

Public Citizen v. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the United States of America, Nuclear Utility Management and Resources Council, Intervenor

901 F.2d 147 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 15, 1990

This deadline is clearly inconsistent with a policy of establishing requirements by a process of case-by-case adjudication. The thing the Commission promulgates must itself establish requirements. … However, that statement came at the end of a paragraph which clearly drew the distinction between procedural and substantive challenges, and which stated that "we have scrutinized regulations immune from direct review by

New South Media Corp. v. Federal Communications Commission

685 F.2d 708 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 13, 1982

, but not necessarily best qualified, third party. … In comments to the FCC and again in its briefs on appeal, NCCB proposed that the Commission waive the old cut-off dates for applications competing with the reopened renewal applications and establish new deadlines.

Association of Retired Railroad Workers, Inc. v. United States Railroad Retirement Board

830 F.2d 331 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 2, 1987

Consistent with these principles, we conclude that section 12(d) on its face qualifies for exemption because it “refers to particular types of matters to be withheld.” … This point is brought out yet more clearly by a specific analysis of section 12(d) of RUIA.

Bethesda Health, Inc. v. Azar

389 F. Supp. 3d 32 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 23, 2019

For comparison, the Board identified a demonstration project in Massachusetts which "established eligibility criteria" and "provided a clearly established benefit-premium subsidy to enroll in a managed care plan which provided … "The regulation describes the pool of qualifying hospital patient days." Forrest General , 926 F.3d at 231 .

United States Postal Service v. Postal Regulatory Commission

785 F.3d 740 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 12, 2015

The parties did not dispute that these noticed price increases, by themselves, fell within the inflation-based price cap established by statute. … for the same rates they currently qualify for.”

Trans Union Corp. v. Federal Trade Commission

267 F.3d 1138 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Oct 23, 2001

Struthers, 319 U.S. 141, 146-47 (1943) (recognizing leafleting as central to public discourse because the "[f]reedom to distribute information to every citizen ... is ... clearly vital to the preservation of a free society … Trans Union's target marketing lists are private speech warranting only qualified constitutional protection.

CREW v. DOJ

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 19, 2022

In light of the sitting President’s immunity from criminal prosecution, Mueller declined to determine whether President Trump’s potentially obstructive conduct constituted a crime. … And those sorts of early-stage discussions would ordinarily qualify for protection under the deliberative- process privilege.

Washburn, Alan v. LaVoie, Michael

437 F.3d 84 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Feb 10, 2006

Even though the recorder picks up most background sounds poorly, you can clearly hear sounds from [the students’ residence] as I was noting the time and event.” Id. … Washburn, too, clearly regarded Garling as a witness; he ultimately filed an affidavit from Garling in support of his defamation suit.

Clark & Reid Company, Inc. v. United States

851 F.2d 1468 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 19, 1988

Sec. 10706 (b)(3)(D). 16 Viewing all rates in the aggregate as constituting a "structure," any change in any rate would superficially qualify as a "change[ ] in tariff structure." … Here the Bureau clearly considered such markets and rates; the changes were distinctly market-specific.

Rice v. United States

245 F.R.D. 3 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 27, 2007

. § 552a(b)(2), FOIA Exemption Six provides that its disclosure requirements do not apply to “personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal … Even assuming arguendo that non-peeuniary *7 harm could qualify as actual damages, plaintiffs’ declarations (their only evidence of actual damages) 4 fall short.

Robert Burns, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. William Long, Administrator, District of Columbia Detention Center, Appellees/cross-Appellants

44 F.3d 1031 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Nov 29, 1994

The qualified immunity doctrine provides that "government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … Because the jury's findings affecting qualified immunity are supported by substantial evidence and Burns's claimed constitutional right and the defendants' corresponding constitutional duties were clearly established at the

Ritholz v. March

105 F.2d 937 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 26, 1939

The bank paid and sued to recover, and the Philippine defense was that legislation subsequent to the passage of the Federal Reserve Act destroyed the immunity claimed by the bank under the statute. … The new legislation amended Sec. 25 but retained the power of national banks to establish branches in United States dependencies.

Hispanic Information & Telecommunications Network, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Daytona Beach Community College, Intervenor

865 F.2d 1289 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 24, 1989

All qualified local applicants filing for licenses during that year, as well as all qualified local entities whose applications were pending as of the start of that period, would be given priority, and mutually ex-elusive … The statute does not preclude the FCC from establishing threshold standards to identify qualified applicants and excluding those applicants who plainly fail to meet the standards.

Thompson v. Washington

497 F.2d 626 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Dec 10, 1973

We think the defense of sovereign immunity raised by the Government is precluded by our disposition in Knox Hill Tenant Council v. … Exclusivity of the government benefit was most clearly presented in Boddie v.

Brady v. Office of the Sergeant at Arms

520 F.3d 490 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 28, 2008

being qualified, the employee was fired, demoted, or otherwise adversely acted upon; and (iv) if the employee was removed, either someone else filled the position or the employer sought other applicants. … Lest there be any lingering uncertainty, we state the rule clearly: In a Title VII disparate-treatment suit where an employee has suffered an adverse employment action and an employer has asserted a legitimate, non-discriminatory

Nemariam v. Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia

315 F.3d 390 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jan 24, 2003

Nem- ariam invoked the jurisdiction of the court under the interna- tional takings provision of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, 28 U.S.C. s 1605(a)(3). … United Technologies Corp.: As a prerequisite, the court must establish whether an adequate forum exists which possesses jurisdiction over the whole case.

Richardson v. Loyola College in Maryland, Inc.

167 F. App'x 223 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 4, 2005

Thus, he was clearly on notice of a possible summary judgment disposition. … Adduci, Mastriani, Meeks & Schill, 43 F.3d 1507, 1512 (D.C.Cir.1995) (McDonnell Douglas complainant must establish, inter alia, that “he was otherwise qualified and performed his duties competently,” and that “others in similar

Warrenner v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission

346 F.2d 836 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · May 13, 1965

to say that it is, we are of the opinion that Warrenner began the operation in good faith under “color” of authority; that his movements were open and undisguised and the transportation was rendered in his own vehicles, clearly … Of course it is true that one who operates in clear and calculated defiance of applicable regulatory laws may have great difficulty in establishing his bona fides for purposes of a grandfather clause. McDonald v.

Firestone v. Fed. Ret. Thrift Inv. Bd.

375 F. Supp. 3d 102 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Mar 25, 2019

Wang's motion challenges her equitable estoppel claim, and she clearly anticipated the same in FRTIB's and TSP's motion. Despite that awareness, the Court lacks Mrs. … Firestone's standing or FRTIB's and TSP's sovereign immunity, nor does it need to evaluate her claims under Rule 12(b)(6). B.

Price v. Barry

53 F.3d 369 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 9, 1995

The use of the word "may" clearly marks the Board's decision as discretionary. See United States v. Rodgers, 461 U.S. 677, 706 , 103 S.Ct. 2132, 2149 , 76 L.Ed.2d 236 (1983). … The statute also grants the Board the power to qualify a prisoner's release on whatever "terms and conditions" the Board sees fit to impose.