Case law

Smith v. Pacific Bell Telephone Co.

649 F. Supp. 2d 1073 · District Court, E.D. California · Aug 12, 2009

There is nothing in the affidavit to establish Mr. Mastrangelo is knowledgeable about or qualified to opine on the reliability of GPS equipment. … If the basis for an expert’s opinion is clearly unreliable, the district court may disregard that opinion in deciding whether a party has created a genuine issue of material fact.

Ledesma v. Marshall

658 F. Supp. 2d 1155 · District Court, E.D. California · Aug 5, 2009

process, so he “has not shown that the state court decisions denying habeas relief were contrary to clearly established federal law.” … Sass, 461 F.3d at 1129 (for purposes of AEDPA, Hill’s “some evidence” standard is “clearly established” federal law).

Solares v. Burns

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

immunity 27 raised by Burnes. … Pena, 976 F.2d at 471-72; see also Lewis, 523 U.S. at 842 n.5 (“[T]he better approach to resolving cases in which the defense of qualified immunity is raised is to determine first whether the plaintiff 28 has alleged

(PC) Mungia v. Sheriffe Department

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 20, 2022

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous when it is based on an 14 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 15 490 U.S. at 327. … However, “[t]o establish a violation of the right of access to the 7 courts, a prisoner must establish that he or she has suffered an actual injury.” Nev. Dep’t of 8 Corrs. v.

(PC) Sullivan v. Adult Correctional Health Care

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 29, 2022

complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner raised claims that are legally 7 “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 8 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Cnty. of Kitsap, 260 F.3d 1124, 1141 (9th 6 Cir. 2001), as amended on denial of reh’g (Oct. 11, 2001). 7 A person alleging a violation of Title II of the ADA must show (1) he is a qualified 8 individual

(PC) Beavers v. Hosey

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 30, 2023

Claims are frivolous where they are based on an indisputably meritless legal theory or 24 where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. … Examples of immunity that would preclude relief during screening, include, but are not 1 limited to, quasi-judicial immunity, sovereign immunity, or qualified immunity.

(PS) Charles v. U.S. Office of Personnel Management

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 10, 2023

IFP statute requires federal courts to dismiss a case if the action is legally 23 “frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks 24 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … AMENDING THE COMPLAINT 2 If plaintiff chooses to amend the complaint, the amended complaint must allege facts 3 establishing the existence of federal jurisdiction.

Young v. Sun Life & Health Ins. Co.

285 F. Supp. 3d 1109 · District Court, E.D. California · Jan 8, 2018

"Any Occupation" is defined as: "[a]ny gainful occupation that you are qualified for or may reasonably become qualified for by education, training or experience. … United Behavioral Health , 764 F.3d 1030 , 1042 (9th Cir. 2014) ("[A]n administrator…abuses its discretion if it relies on clearly erroneous findings of fact in making benefit determinations") (internal citation omitted).

Anthony J. Davis v. Tuolumne County, et al.

District Court, E.D. California · May 13, 2026

Id. 21 District courts must deny requests for mandatory injunctions unless the law and facts clearly 22 favor a moving party. Id. The Court will not grant such requests in doubtful cases. … in violation of the First 24 Amendment. 25 In his present motion, Plaintiff seeks an order that Defendant Hurtado provide mental 26 health care by a qualified

(PS) Reedy v. State of California

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

and qualified immunity. … Defendants counter that plaintiff has no state-law property right to CalWORKs benefits 7 because he did not qualify for those benefits.

Shirely

District Court, E.D. California · May 5, 2026

Plaintiff claims the Warden violated the Federal & State 22 Clean Water Acts and is liable under § 1983 due to the unconstitutional conditions at her prison. 23 Plaintiff avers that the Warden “was clearly aware of the … To establish a violation of the Eighth 23 Amendment, the prisoner must “show that the officials acted with deliberate indifference . . .” 24 Labatad v. Corrs.

(PC) Kawamoto v. Covello

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 22, 2025

Second, as a state prisoner, plaintiff was qualified to access the 4 ASU yard and participate in activities there. See Yeskey, 524 U.S. at 210. … A 26 showing of merely negligent medical care is not enough to establish a constitutional violation. 27 Frost v.

(PC) Peyton v. Cates

District Court, E.D. California · May 5, 2022

Immunity 6 Plaintiff’s third claim asserts that Defendant is not entitled to immunity. … See Groten v. 8 California, 251 F.3d 844, 851 (9th Cir. 2001) (“Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense 9 that must be raised by a defendant.”).

Williams v. AB Car Rental Services, Inc.

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

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

Brown v. Takeuchi Mfg. Co. (U.S.)

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 21, 2023

If only a portion of 20 the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the 21 protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 22 … If only a portion of the 2 material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the 3 protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins). 4

Garcia v. County of Stanislaus

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 2, 2021

If only a portion 17 or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 18 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 27 for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by 1 (b) for testimony given in deposition

C. v. Merced City School District

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

If only a portion or portions 15 of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify the 16 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 25 Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate 26 markings in the margins).

(PC) Miller v. Park

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 12, 2022

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 … Sakai, 48 F.3d 1082, 1087 (9th Cir. 1995)). 13 The plaintiff must first establish a “serious medical need” by showing that “failure to treat a 14 prisoner’s condition could result in further significant injury or the

Californians for Alternatives to Toxics v. United States Fish & Wildlife Service

814 F. Supp. 2d 992 · District Court, E.D. California · Sep 6, 2011

The record establishes only a “moderate degree of threat for extinction” (UF # 62), and defendants have not proffered any evidence to establish that the PCT is at imminent risk if the Project does not proceed now. … Plaintiffs' CEQA claim was previously dismissed as barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity. (Mem. & Order [Docket # 23], filed Oct. 29, 2010.) 4 . The background section will reference facts from three sources.

(PC) Harding v. Correctional Health Services

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 13, 2025

In the 24 alternative, defendant Mencias argues that she is entitled to qualified immunity. (Id. at 15-16.) 25 III. … Kiener’s education, training, and experience qualify him as 24 an expert. See Fed. R. Evid. 702.