Case law

(HC) Haynie v. Cates

District Court, E.D. California · May 2, 2024

Only Supreme Court precedent may constitute “clearly established 22 Federal law,” but courts may look to circuit law “to ascertain whether…the particular point in 23 issue is clearly established by Supreme Court precedent … Clearly established federal law permits judicial 21 4 The parallel citation to Swain further supports this interpretation.

Barajas

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

excluded from participating in or 18 denied the benefits of any programs, services, or activities provided by a public entity (e.g. 19 MCSP) or otherwise discriminated against by a public entity; that he was otherwise qualified … Conn v. 2 City of Reno, 591 F.3d 1081, 1095 (9th Cir. 2010), vacated, 563 U.S. 915 (2011), reinstated in 3 relevant part on remand, 658 F.3d 897 (9th Cir. 2011). 4 A plaintiff can establish deliberate

Arroyo v. Graham Packaging Company L.P.

District Court, E.D. California · May 22, 2023

If only a portion or portions of the material on a 13 page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the 14 protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins … If only a portion or portions of the material 24 on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the 25 protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 26

(PC) Jacobs v. CDCR

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 6, 2021

Even gross negligence is insufficient to establish deliberate indifference to 12 serious medical needs. See Wood v. … April 20, 2006) (granting qualified immunity to defendants when 13 prisoner slipped and fell in puddle of water resulting from leaky roof known to defendants), aff’d 14 by 2008 WL 686740 (9th Cir.

Board of Trustees of IBEW Local 100 Pension Trust Fund v. Trinity Construction Enterprises, Inc.

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 10, 2024

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, 7 the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate 8 markings in the margins). … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for 18 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 19 appropriate markings in the margins).

Michael Bruce Anthony McPherson, aka Makal B. Makfarsan v. Federal District Courts, et al.

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 7, 2026

or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally 28 “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 1 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … The Court may . . . dismiss a claim 10 as frivolous where it is based on an indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual 11 contentions are clearly baseless.” Howell v.

Griggs v. Banuelos

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

“The requisite causal connection may be established when an official 9 sets in motion a ‘series of acts by others which the actor knows or reasonably should know would 10 cause others to inflict’ constitutional harms. … The amended complaint should be clearly and boldly titled “First 2 Amended Complaint,” refer to the appropriate case number, and be an original signed under penalty 3 of perjury.

Covello

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

Only Supreme Court precedent may constitute “clearly established 23 Federal law,” but courts may look to circuit law “to ascertain whether…the particular point in 24 issue is clearly established by Supreme Court precedent … The question at this stage is whether the state court 7 reasonably applied clearly established federal law to the facts before it. Id. at 181-182.

Charmar Williams v. Kern State Prison, et al.

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

Plaintiff failed to clearly state factual support for what happened, 28 when it happened, and who was involved. As Plaintiff was informed, he must allege what each 1 defendant did that violated his rights. … Even gross 25 negligence is insufficient to establish deliberate indifference to serious medical needs. See Wood 26 v.

B&G Foods North America, Inc. v. Embry

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 17, 2023

If only a portion 8 or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 9 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 10 … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for 18 protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making 19 appropriate markings in the margins).

Schell v. United States

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 30, 2024

The plaintiff has the burden of 16 establishing the court’s subject matter jurisdiction. Edison v. United States, 822 F.3d 510, 517 17 (9th Cir. 2016). … See, e.g., Lesoeur, 21 F.3d at 969 (National Park Service’s 10 “failure to warn that the Tribe’s rafting tours were not regulated clearly implicated important 11 political policy considerations” impacting relations between

Verduzco

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 9, 2025

Id. at 251–52. 26 In the endeavor to establish the existence of a factual dispute, the opposing party need not 27 establish a material issue of fact conclusively in its favor. … A plaintiff is required to meet the following four criteria 14 in order to establish a prima facie case of sex discrimination: (1) he belongs to a protected class; 15 (2) he was qualified for the position; (3) he was

Michael McPherson, aka Makal B. Makfarsan v. Federal Government, et al.

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 6, 2026

The Court may . . . dismiss a claim 9 as frivolous where it is based on an indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual 10 contentions are clearly baseless.” Howell v. … A review of Plaintiff’s complaint establishes that it 12 contains fantastical claims.

(PC) Gray v. Home Depot Company

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

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 8 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 9 490 U.S. at 327. … Circumstances common to most 14 prisoners, such as lack of legal education and limited law library access, do not establish 15 exceptional circumstances that warrant a request for voluntary assistance of counsel. 16

(PC) Xavier v. Gonzales

District Court, E.D. California · May 5, 2025

Plaintiff alleges that “stop 17 resisting” was “clearly a pre-arranged signal” between the three defendants, because as soon as 18 Gonzalez made that statement, plaintiff was scooped and slammed forward. Id. … To establish an Eighth Amendment 9 violation, a plaintiff must allege that he was deprived of something sufficiently serious and that 10 the deprivation occurred with a deliberate indifference to the plaintiff’s health

Burgess v. Alternative Sierra Investments, LLC

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 28, 2024

If only a portion or portions of the material on a page 27 qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., 28 by making appropriate markings in the margins) and … If only a portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, 11 the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate 12 markings in the margins) and

(PC) Ramirez v. CDCR - California Corrections

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 21, 2020

“[E]ven gross negligence is insufficient to establish a 2 constitutional violation.” Id. (citing Wood v. … Cases in 28 this Circuit addressing First Amendment retaliation claims involve situations where the action 1 taken by the defendant was clearly adverse to the plaintiff. See Hines v.

(PS) Legardy v. Unknown

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 26, 2023

Moreover, a determination that a plaintiff qualifies financially for in forma pauperis 1 status does not complete the inquiry required by the statute. … Under this standard, a court must dismiss a complaint as frivolous 18 where it is based on an indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are 19 clearly baseless.

King v. City of Sacramento

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 13, 2023

If only a 2 portion 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 in the 4 margins). … This 20 provision is not intended to modify whatever procedure may be established in an e-discovery 21 order that provides for production without prior privilege review.

(PC) Haynes v. Orel

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 24, 2021

“[A] judge may dismiss . . . claims which are ‘based on indisputably meritless legal 28 theories’ or whose ‘factual contentions are clearly baseless.’” Jackson v. … Here, plaintiff’s allegations fail to establish that the limitation 3 on his canteen purchases lacked penological justification.