Case law

(PC) Ogelsby v. Department of Corrections

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 23, 2019

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 4 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 5 490 U.S. at 327. … Plaintiff alleges that he 19 is disabled as defined under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), and therefore qualifies 20 for shower assistance and to be provided safe equipment such as a shower chair, shower

(PC) Abreu v. Shasta County Sheriff's Office

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 7, 2025

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 10 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 11 490 U.S. at 327. … The requisite causal connection between a supervisor’s wrongful conduct and the 6 violation of the prisoner’s constitutional rights can be established in a number of ways, including 7 by demonstrating that a supervisor

(PC) Green v. Batchelor

District Court, E.D. California · Feb 14, 2022

Defendant has filed a motion for summary judgment, 18 arguing that plaintiff cannot establish a First Amendment violation. ECF No. 41. … Defendant 19 argues in the alternative that she is entitled to qualified immunity. Id.

(PC) Green v. State of CA

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 16, 2024

It is well established that “inmates lack a separate constitutional entitlement 5 to a specific prison grievance procedure.” Ramirez v. Galaza, 334 F.3d 850, 860 (9th Cir. 2003) 6 (citing Mann v. … Plaintiff is advised that in an amended complaint he must clearly identify each 10 defendant and the action that defendant took that violated his constitutional rights.

Connelly v. Starbucks Corporation

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

Except as otherwise provided in this Order 2 (see, e.g., section 5.2(a) below), or as otherwise stipulated or ordered, Disclosure or Discovery 3 Material that qualifies for protection under this Order must be clearly … If only a 9 portion or portions 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 in the 11 margins)

(PC) Hans v. Baniga

District Court, E.D. California · Nov 1, 2019

To establish a claim of deliberate indifference arising from a delay in providing care, a 2 plaintiff must show that the delay was harmful. See Berry v. … The amended complaint should be clearly titled, in 11 bold font, “First Amended Complaint,” reference the appropriate case number, and be an original 12 signed under penalty of perjury.

Romero v. California Highway Patrol

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 1, 2023

If only a portion or 10 portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 11 identify the inspection … If only a portion or 25 portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 26 identify the protected

Debbs v. Valley Convalscent Hospital

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 21, 2022

Aug. 8, 2017) (“Supervisor defendants are entitled to qualified immunity where the 22 allegations against them are simply ‘bald’ or ‘conclusory’ because such allegations do not 23 … The amended complaint should be clearly and boldly 23 titled “Second Amended Complaint,” refer to the appropriate case number, and be an original 24 signed under penalty of perjury.

(PC) Thomas v. Reyna

District Court, E.D. California · Nov 22, 2021

Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because a 3 correctional officer in Defendants’ position would reasonably believe that it was necessary to 4 enter the cell and apply force to Plaintiff … Based on this recommendation, Defendants’ motion for qualified immunity 5 shall not be considered 6 VI.

Warren v. Winco Foods, LLC

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 11, 2022

If only a 24 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also 25 must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the 26 margins … If only a portion or 7 portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 8 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 9

Blankenship v. Penske Truck Leasing Co., L.P.

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 20, 2021

If only a portion 6 or 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). 8 … If only a portion or portions of the material on 16 a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected 17 portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins).

(PS) Halousek v. Sacramento County Sheriff

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 18, 2022

However, a determination that a plaintiff qualifies financially for in forma 4 pauperis status does not complete the inquiry required by the statute. … City of Los Angeles, 533 F.3d 1010, 1022 (9th Cir. 2008)). 17 There are three ways a “policy” can be established. See Clouthier v.

Estate of Ezekiel Rivera, et al. v. Kern County Sheriff’s Department, et al.

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 23, 2026

The County and Sheriff’s Department argue at the 18 threshold that they are immune to these claims.2 (Doc. 27 at 14–15.) … Whether an officer had the 12 necessary “specific intent” depends on whether the right at issue was “clearly delineated and 13 plainly applicable under the circumstances” and whether the defendant officer had a “particular

(PC) Wolinski v. Abdulgader

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 27, 2022

“To establish a violation of Title II of the ADA, a plaintiff must show that 23 (1) [he] is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) [he] was excluded from participation in or 24 otherwise discriminated against with … “To establish a violation of 23 § 504 of the RA, a plaintiff must show that (1) [he] is handicapped within the meaning of the RA; 24 (2) [he] is otherwise qualified for the benefit or services sought; (3) [he] was denied

Willis v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

250 F. Supp. 3d 628 · District Court, E.D. California · Apr 5, 2017

Under Lueras, this allegation is insufficient to establish defendant owed plaintiff a duty of care. Accordingly, the court must dismiss plaintiffs second cause of action. … Plaintiffs complaint clearly stated only two causes of action for negligence and violation of California Civil Code § 2923.6(c)-(d); it does not include a cause of action under California Civil Code § 2923.7.

Barnes

District Court, E.D. California · Nov 4, 2025

In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the 18 court will (1) accept as true all the factual allegations contained in the complaint, unless they are 19 clearly baseless or fanciful; (2) construe those allegations … Here, however, the allegations do not 22 suggest any additional facts Plaintiff can plead to establish federal question jurisdiction, or to 23 establish diversity between the parties.

(PC) Ellesbury v. Fernandez

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 2, 2020

Qualified Immunity 23 Defendants argue that defendant Fernandez should be granted summary judgment on the 24 grounds that he is entitled to qualified immunity … Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (2001), the Supreme Court set forth a two-pronged test to 26 determine whether qualified immunity exists.

(PC) Jones v. Castillo

District Court, E.D. California · Feb 18, 2025

complaint, or a portion of it, if the prisoner has raised claims that are 17 frivolous or malicious, that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 18 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 12131(1)(B)). 3 To establish a violation of Title II of the ADA, a plaintiff must show that (1) [he] is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) [he] was excluded

(PS) Malbrough v. Bibby

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 9, 2022

A 18 court may dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an indisputably meritless legal theory 19 or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. … Plaintiff's Moorish citizenship argument is a frivolous attempt to establish diversity jurisdiction where none exits, and the ploy is not new.

(PC) Miles v. Garland

District Court, E.D. California · Nov 16, 2021

Defendants have met their 24 burden of establishing that Appeal Number 15-15960 counts as a strike. … The dismissal was based on a finding that the official capacity 3 claims against the police officers were not cognizable and that defendant Moore was immune 4 from suit.