Case law

(PS) Van den Heuvel v. Placerville Self Storage

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 3, 2019

statute authorizes federal courts to dismiss a case if the 24 action is legally “frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, 25 or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 2 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless.

(PC) Cardenas v. Edwards

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

However, plaintiff has not clearly stated such claims in 10 the body of the complaint. … By establishing the existence of a serious medical need, a prisoner satisfies the 15 objective requirement for proving an Eighth Amendment violation. Farmer v.

(PC) Stephens v. Felder

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

dismiss the complaint, or any portion 11 of the complaint, if the complaint “is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which 12 relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … The plaintiff must first establish a “serious 20 medical need” by showing that “failure to treat a prisoner’s condition could result in further 21 significant injury or the ‘unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain.’

Altman v. PNC Mortgage

850 F. Supp. 2d 1057 · District Court, E.D. California · Jan 20, 2012

Altmann into loans for which he was not qualified. … In absence of necessary facts to establish a covered loan, the complaint’s twelfth claim fails. See Fortaleza v.

Sacramento Suburban Water District v. Elementis Chromium Inc.

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

Its action qualifies as a 21 “challenge” to the cleanup.”). 22 Thus, the RCRA claim is barred by § 113 of CERCLA. 23 C. … The United States, however, has the burden 4 of proving one of the FTCA’s exceptions to the waiver of immunity applies. Id.

CTI III, LLC v. Devine

District Court, E.D. California · May 18, 2023

If only a portion or 3 portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify 4 the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins) and must … If only a portion or 15 portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly identify 16 the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins) and

National Meat Ass'n v. Deukmejian

562 F. Supp. 357 · District Court, E.D. California · Apr 21, 1983

This reasoning, because it ignores two important qualifying principles, is rejected as overly simplistic. … Here the limitation of membership to California residents is clearly not irrational.

Ramsey v. Farmers New World Life Insurance Company

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 4, 2020

If only a portion or portions of the material 20 on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing Party also must clearly 21 identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings … If only a 5 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the Producing 6 Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate 7 markings in the margins).

(PC) Taylor v. Ingram

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

Defendant Valencia 24 The facts in the complaint are insufficient to establish a retaliation claim against defendant 25 Valencia. … However, the complaint 11 fails to clearly state any other cognizable claims.

(PS) Mallory v. County of Sacramento

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 15, 2025

IFP statute requires federal courts to dismiss a case if the action is legally 25 “frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted or seeks 26 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the 13 court will (1) accept as true all of the factual allegations contained in the complaint, unless they 14 are clearly baseless or fanciful, (2) construe those allegations

(PC)Colbert v. Bell

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 15, 2021

Bodily Privacy 8 In the Ninth Circuit, “[i]t is clearly established that the Fourteenth Amendment protects a 9 sphere of privacy and the most ‘basic subject of privacy . … Ramirez, 967 F.2d 1413, 1416 (9th Cir. 1992) (“The right to bodily privacy is fundamental . . . 13 and was clearly established at the time . . . .”).

Ballardo

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 24, 2026

Plaintiff’s 23 allegations are disjointed, and his amended complaint does not clearly state what happened, when 24 it happened, and who was involved. … Lockyer, 568 F.3d 1063, 1070 (9th Cir. 2009) (explaining state 22 departmental regulations, like CDCR operations manual, do not establish a federal constitutional 23 violation); Prock v.

(PC) Uhuru v. Shen

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 16, 2025

Schriro, 9 514 F.3d 878, 889 (9th Cir. 2008) (“Once the plaintiff establishes that the challenged state action 10 substantially burdens his religious exercise, the government bears the burden of establishing that 11 … Adams, 636 F.3d 525, 531 (9th 26 Cir. 2011) (concluding prison officials were entitled to qualified immunity from § 1983 claim that 27 post-riot lockdown of prison resulted in denial of Eighth Amendment right to exercise

(PS) Hill v. City of Sacramento

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 6, 2023

Claims 6 under section 52.1 may be brought against public officials who are alleged to interfere with 7 protected rights, and qualified immunity is not available for those claims. … The elements of a 19 cause of action for negligence are well established.

(PC) Flores v. Corcarn

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 11, 2021

or portion thereof if the prisoner has 25 raised claims that are legally “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief 26 may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … “To establish a violation of Title II of the ADA, a plaintiff must show that 20 (1) [he] is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) [he] was excluded from participation in or 21 otherwise discriminated against with

Bradshaw

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 2, 2026

In 12 reviewing a complaint under this standard, the court accepts as true the factual 13 allegations contained in the complaint, unless they are clearly baseless or fanciful, and 14 construes those allegations in the … “In order to establish municipal liability [under 18 Monell], a plaintiff must show that a ‘policy or custom’ led to the plaintiff’s injury.” Castro 19 v.

(PC) Hill v. Lynch

District Court, E.D. California · Nov 25, 2024

Additionally, 24 defendants claim qualified immunity. … However, the non-moving party is not required to establish a material 8 issue of fact conclusively in its favor; it is sufficient that “the claimed factual dispute be shown to 9 require a jury or judge to resolve the

(PC) J'Weial v. Newsom

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 8, 2020

or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally 9 “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 10 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … [T]hat edict contains one significant qualifier: the remedies must indeed be 14 “available” to the prisoner.

(PS) Stratton v. PHH Mortgage Corp.

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 11, 2024

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 … Id. 23 “It is well established that a district court has broad discretion to control its own docket, 24 and that includes the power to dismiss duplicative claims.”

(PC) Beecher v. Union Supply Direct, Inc.

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

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an indisputably 13 meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 14 327. … To establish federal 20 jurisdiction, Article III of the Constitution requires a live case or controversy that arises under the 21 Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States. 28 U.S.C. § 1331; United States