Case law

EZ Pedo, Inc. v. Mayclin Dental Studio, Inc.

284 F. Supp. 3d 1065 · District Court, E.D. California · Feb 14, 2018

Inherent Distinctiveness EZ-Pedo argues each one of its three advertisements qualifies as inherently distinctive trade dress because each contains "beautiful, glamorous, fanciful, recognizable" imagery. Opp'n at 7. … In sum, because it has not clearly defined its claimed trade dress, plaintiff has raised no triable issue as to inherent distinctiveness. See Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc. v. Am.

Firearms Policy Coalition Second Amendment Defense Committee v. Harris

192 F. Supp. 3d 1120 · District Court, E.D. California · Jun 22, 2016

Plaintiffs have decided that their political interests are best served by opposing the Initiative before it qualifies for the ballot. … That someone—such as Koenig or Chollet—“has an economic motivation” for speech "would clearly be insufficient by itself to turn the materials into commercial speech.” Bolger v.

Riva on the River Homeowners Assoc. v. The Management Assoc, Inc.

District Court, E.D. California · May 6, 2025

If only a portion 22 or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 23 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 24 … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for 5 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 6 appropriate markings in the margins).

(PS) Van den Heuvel v. Placerville Self Storage

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 10, 2019

immune) from those acts 11 taken in clear absence of jurisdiction. … Thus, for example, in a case where a judge actually ordered the 15 seizure of an individual by means of excessive force, an act clearly outside of his legal authority, 16 he remained immune because the order was given

Jackson v. Kaplan Higher Education, LLC

106 F. Supp. 3d 1118 · District Court, E.D. California · May 5, 2015

A plaintiff in an action for violation of FEHA has the burden to first establish a prima facie case of discrimination by showing she was (1) a member of a protected class, (2) that she was qualified for the position she held … There is some dispute over whether the evidence cited by Plaintiff to establish this fact is competent to establish the fact alleged.

(PS) Rogers v. Jones

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 11, 2023

However, a determination that a plaintiff qualifies financially for in forma 4 pauperis status does not complete the inquiry required by the statute. … Under this standard, a court must dismiss a 21 complaint as frivolous where it is based on an indisputably meritless legal theory or where the 22 factual contentions are clearly baseless.

Vital Distributions, LLC v. Pepperidge Farm, Inc.

District Court, E.D. California · May 10, 2022

for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 2 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 11 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 12 appropriate markings in the margins).

(PC)Lewis v. Allison

District Court, E.D. California · Feb 26, 2024

Plaintiff has not clearly done so 17 in relation any of the defendants listed on multiple pages in his Complaint. … An authorized deprivation is one 15 carried out pursuant to established state procedures, regulations, or statutes.

(PS) Brown v. Department of Veteran Affairs

District Court, E.D. California · May 21, 2024

In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the court will 1 (1) accept as true all of the factual allegations contained in the complaint, unless they are clearly 2 baseless or fanciful, (2) construe those allegations … A federal court is presumed to lack subject matter jurisdiction until plaintiff 13 establishes otherwise. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America, 511 U.S. 375 (1994); 14 Stock West, Inc. v.

Ponce v. Housing Authority of County of Tulare

389 F. Supp. 635 · District Court, E.D. California · Jan 16, 1975

The procedure will be similar to that provided in this section for establishing and approving rental charges initially.” … Plaintiffs are represented by well-qualified attorneys, so the quality of representation is not in question.

Brian Beinlick v. C. Smith, et al.

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 17, 2026

In the answer, Defendants assert the 3 following affirmative defenses: (1) qualified immunity; (2) lack of injury; (3) lack of facts 4 establishing entitlement to punitive damages; (4) immunity from damages for official

Alonso v. Blackstone Financial Group LLC

962 F. Supp. 2d 1188 · District Court, E.D. California · Aug 2, 2013

This is clearly a national law intended to have nationwide application which requires uniformity in application. … There are clearly issues of material fact which the trier of fact will determine.

Vue v. County of Yuba

District Court, E.D. California · May 23, 2022

If only a portion or 9 portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify 10 the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins) and … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 22 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by 23 making appropriate markings in the margins) and

Anthony Vinyards v. Natural Plant Protection

District Court, E.D. California · Nov 26, 2024

An occurrence that merely motivates an optional decision does not qualify as a 2 requirement.” Bates, 544 U.S. at 443. … However, Plaintiff’s FAC clearly 1 demonstrates that it only seeks monetary damages, and it does not request Defendants take any 2 action or make any modifications to its label. (Doc. 29 at 5–6.)

(PC) Beinlick v. Pfile

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 23, 2023

immunity. … immunity.

Hernandez v. Holt

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 3, 2021

immunity. 22 Vandenburg v. … “[T]here is a clearly established constitutional due 17 process right not to be subjected to criminal charges on the basis of false evidence that was 18 deliberately fabricated by the government.” Devereaux v.

Rush v. City of Fairfield

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 4, 2022

If only a portion or 6 portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 7 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 16 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 17 appropriate markings in the margins).

(PS)Seneka v. County of Yolo

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 21, 2021

Doyle, 429 U.S. 274, 280 (1977). 28 A state is not entitled to immunity if it has waived its immunity or if Congress has abrogated the 1 state’s immunity through a valid exercise of its power. Lavia v. … Nor does the First Amended Complaint clearly identify the specific public 7 service or program from which plaintiff was allegedly excluded or denied services.

Occupational-Urgent Care Health Systems, Inc. v. Sutro & Co.

711 F. Supp. 1016 · District Court, E.D. California · Apr 21, 1989

The big problem here is that short selling does not qualify as racketeering activity. Accordingly, plaintiff’s section 1962(a) claim is subject to dismissal. C. … However, the Ninth Circuit has clearly stated that “futile amendments” will not be allowed. Jones, 733 F.2d at 650 (citation omitted).

(PC) York v. Garcia

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 27, 2019

5 the Court finds that there is no need to decide the issue of whether Defendant Garcia is entitled to 6 qualified immunity. … Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 201 (2001) (“If no constitutional right would 7 have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries 8 concerning qualified immunity.”).