Case law

(PC) Johnson v. Chau

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 20, 2019

Qualified Immunity 2 Defendants move for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. 3 “Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity with respect to discretionary … Ct. 1843, 1866 (2017). 5 The Supreme Court has established a two-step inquiry for resolving a qualified immunity defense: 6 the constitutional inquiry and the qualified immunity inquiry. See Saucier v.

(PC) Fuller v. Nguyen

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 24, 2023

Id. at 12-16. 9 Finally, defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … The opposition does not address defendants’ threshold argument of 18 administrative exhaustion, nor does it address the issue of qualified immunity.

(PC) Valenzuela v. Thorntona

District Court, E.D. California · Feb 21, 2025

dismiss the complaint, or any portion 1 of the complaint, if the complaint “is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which 2 relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … “[T]o establish municipal liability, a plaintiff must show that a ‘policy or custom’ 15 led to the plaintiff’s injury.” Castro v. County of L.A., 833 F.3d 1060, 1073 (9th Cir. 2016) (en 16 banc) (quoting Monell v.

N.G.

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 8, 2026

If only a portion 11 or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 12 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). … 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 20

Gutierrez v. Abbott Laboratories

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 11, 2025

In reply, 8 Defendant maintains this statement does not qualify under either subsection defining implied 9 nutrient content claims. … The Court therefore similarly finds Plaintiff adequately establishes 13 a claim under the “unfair” prong of the UCL.

(PC) Kauth v. Manuel

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 20, 2025

Defendant contacted him “for the 11 Tulare County Sheriff’s Office,” and Plaintiff attaches four pages from a Tule River Tribal Police 12 report that he contends “clearly states” Defendant “did a wants and [warrants] … Supp. 3d 1 “Although sovereign immunity is only quasi-jurisdictional in nature, Rule 12(b)(1) is still a 2 proper vehicle for invoking sovereign immunity from suit.” Pistor, 791 F.3d at 1111; see also 3 Sato v.

(PS) Sandford v. Terranova DDP

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 3, 2025

In 8 reviewing a complaint under this standard, the court accepts as true the factual 9 allegations contained in the complaint, unless they are clearly baseless or fanciful, and 10 construes those allegations in the … Under the doctrine of judicial 13 immunity, judges have absolute immunity for their acts related to the judicial process. 14 See In re Castillo, 297 F.3d 940, 947 (9th Cir. 2002); Demoran v.

(PC) Ray v. Sullivan

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 27, 2021

. § 22 1915(g) be denied because plaintiff has had at least three dismissals that constitute strikes and he 23 has not established he meets the imminent danger exception. … A dismissal for failure to state a claim relying on qualified 12 immunity counts as a strike. Reberger v. Baker, 657 F. App’x 681, 683-84 (9th Cir.

Giannini v. County of Sacramento

District Court, E.D. California · May 26, 2022

cause in this case and I sincerely believe that the claims presented in this lawsuit 14 are meritorious and that he deserves compensation for the violation of rights that are established … form the California Courts of Appeals, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, and 16 the United States Supreme Court that are sufficiently on point as to deprive any potential claims of qualified

(PS) Santillan v. California Bar Examiners

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 15, 2024

In a facial challenge, the 25 moving party asserts that the allegations in the complaint are “insufficient on their face” to 26 establish federal jurisdiction. Id. … To state a Title II claim, plaintiff must allege that: “(1) she is an individual with a 14 disability; (2) she is otherwise qualified to participate in or receive the benefit of a public entity’s 15 services, programs

(PS) Wilt v. Pfizer, Inc.

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 12, 2025

Moreover, plaintiff’s claim that defendant engaged in “false, 20 deceptive, and misleading acts and practices” in violation of state law does not establish federal 21 jurisdiction. … set forth her various claims in separate sections and clearly identify which defendants are allegedly at fault for each claim (e.g., Claim I against defendants X, Y, and Z, 4 Claim II against defendants

(PC) Beteta v. Gray

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 12, 2024

Furthermore, because the facts, taken in the light most favorable to the 24 plaintiff, do not demonstrate that defendant's conduct violated a statutory or constitutional right 25 clearly established at the time of time … of defendant’s conduct, defendant is entitled to immunity 26 under the qualified immunity doctrine.

(PS) Myers v. Larson

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 21, 2025

A federal court’s jurisdiction may be established in one of two ways: actions 25 arising under federal law or those between citizens of different states in which the 26 alleged damages exceed $75,000. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 … First, Plaintiffs seek to undermine a state court’s action by 23 interfering with the adjudication of ongoing state court proceedings, which clearly 24 implicates the State’s interest in enforcing the orders of its courts

Corona v. City of Rocklin

District Court, E.D. California · Feb 28, 2025

If only a 15 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 16 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the 17 margins … If only a portion or 26 portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 27

(PS) Morris v. Solano County HSS Behavioral Health Divison

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 24, 2024

In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the 5 court accepts as true the factual allegations contained in the complaint, unless they are clearly 6 baseless or fanciful, and construes those allegations in the light … To establish a prima facie case 3 of discrimination under Title I of the ADA, a plaintiff must prove “(1) she was disabled under the 4 ADA; (2) she was a qualified individual with a disability; (3) she was discriminated

(PC) Fearence v. CDCR

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 30, 2025

“To establish a violation 20 of Title II of the ADA, a plaintiff must show that (1) [ ]he is a qualified individual with a 21 disability; (2) [ ]he was excluded from participation in or otherwise discriminated against … Retaliation 16 The right of access to the courts extends to the exercise of established prison grievance 17 procedures, Bradley v.

(PC) Crowder v. Fox

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 19, 2019

Qualified Immunity 22 Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil 23 damages where their discretionary decisions did not violate a clearly established constitutional 24 … Thus, these 14 Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity at this stage of the pleadings.

A.S. v. Point Quest

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 15, 2024

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for 15 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) 16 (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). … If only a portion or portions of 26 the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 27 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the 1 (b)

Madan v. Affinitiv, Inc.

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 29, 2024

If only a portion 9 or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 10 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins.) 11 … If only a portion or portions of the material 19 on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 20 portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).

(PC) Lopez v. Praveen

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 27, 2024

immunity. … The matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge to determine whether 21 | Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, and whether summary judgement should 22 | be granted on that basis. 23 IT IS SO