Case law

Secco v. Standard Insurance Company

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 13, 2020

If only a portion or portions of the 24 material 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 … 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 on the document). 8

(PC) Johnson v. California Department of Corrections

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 14, 2023

On March 23, 2022, the Court determined the complaint was appropriate for service 21 on the individual defendants, see ECF No. 18, and recommended that CDCR be dismissed as an 22 immune defendant, see ECF No. 22. … See ECF No. 45, pg. 3. 16 In light of the Court’s discussion above regarding Plaintiff’s inability to establish 17 causation, Plaintiff is unable to establish the causation aspect of an ADA claim requiring

Turner v. Hickman

342 F. Supp. 2d 887 · District Court, E.D. California · Sep 30, 2004

See also Warburton, 2 F.Supp.2d at 318 (“The emphasis placed on ‘God,’ spirituality and faith in a ‘higher power’ by twelve-step programs such as A.A. or N.A. clearly supports a determination that the underlying basis of … While on May 27, 2004, defendants submitted evidence indicating that plaintiff has qualified for placement in a secular substance abuse program at his prison, but has indicated that he does not wish to enroll in the program

Tuck's Restaurant and Bar v. Newsom

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

Furthermore, plaintiffs had not established good cause to justify 17 reopening discovery. Id. 18 This case is analogous to Navarro. … The court need not and does not consider whether defendant Elliott is 5 entitled to qualified immunity, see Mot. at 23–25; Reply at 12–13, whether the County had an 6 unconstitutional policy or practice, see Mot. at 25

(PC) Johnson v. Nelson

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 30, 2020

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 18 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 19 490 U.S. at 327. … By establishing the existence of a serious medical need, a prisoner satisfies the 26 objective requirement for proving an Eighth Amendment violation. Farmer v.

(PC) Davis v. Bobbla

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 2, 2023

By establishing the existence of a serious medical need, a prisoner satisfies the 23 objective requirement for proving an Eighth Amendment violation. Farmer v. … Plaintiff is advised that in an 8 amended complaint he must clearly identify each defendant and the action that defendant took 9 that violated his constitutional rights.

Culinary Studios, Inc. v. Newsom

District Court, E.D. California · Feb 8, 2021

First, the statewide spread of Covid 19 and the efforts to limit its adverse impact are clearly 18 matters of statewide importance. … that they qualified for an 6 exemption.

Christensen v. Goodman Distribution, Inc.

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 17, 2020

This doctrine is distinct from the attorney- 22 client privilege and is “not a privilege but a qualified immunity protecting [certain material] from 23 discovery.” See Admiral Ins. Co. v. U.S. Dist. … Court, 881 F.2d 1486, 1494 (9th Cir. 1989). 24 To qualify for protection against discovery under the work product doctrine, the 25 documents or information must: (1) “be ‘prepared in anticipation of litigation or

Hill

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 27, 2025

Abbey, 263 F.3d 1070 (9th Cir. 2001) (en banc) (“Devereaux”). 22 In Devereaux, the Ninth Circuit held that “there is a clearly established constitutional due process 23 right not to be subjected to criminal charges on … To establish the second element of causation, the plaintiff must show that (a) the act 17 was the cause in fact of the deprivation of liberty, meaning that the injury would not have 18 occurred in the absence of the conduct

(PS) Liang v. Kallis

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 30, 2021

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 6 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. … The only statute listed by 25 plaintiffs is clearly inapplicable to this case.

(PC) Williams v. Ali

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

Ali took place on June 5, 2020, and yet the undisputed evidence 6 before the court establishes that defendant Dr. Ali was not working at the California Medical 7 Facility (CMF) on June 5, 2020. (Doc. … “[d]uring a 18 19 2 As to the remaining grounds that were raised in defendant’s motion for summary judgment regarding punitive damages and qualified

United States v. Phillips

9 F. Supp. 3d 1130 · District Court, E.D. California · Mar 27, 2014

In this case, the government never clearly states for what crime Defendant was arrested. 3 However, it is clear *1137 that Officers Huff and Boyce had probable cause to arrest Defendant for possession of marijuana and/or … “Under Opperman, the car phone search must be conducted according to an established policy of the law enforcement agency.” Id.

(PC) Whitely v. Lebeck

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 23, 2020

“[A] judge may dismiss . . . claims which are ‘based on indisputably meritless legal 12 theories’ or whose ‘factual contentions are clearly baseless.’” Jackson v. … A prison official’s denial of an inmate appeal thus 22 does not qualify as a constitutional violation.

(PC) Collins v. Smith

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 11, 2025

performing this screening function, the court must dismiss any claim that “(1) is frivolous, 7 malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or (2) seeks monetary relief 8 from a defendant who is immune … A 14 showing of merely negligent medical care is not enough to establish a constitutional violation. 15 Frost v.

Polayo

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 29, 2025

Thus, § 1915(e)(2) allows judges to 4 dismiss a claim based on factual allegations that are clearly baseless, such as facts describing 5 “fantastic or delusional scenarios.” … July 20, 2020) (“there is no clearly established 23 7 A prisoner has no constitutional right to have the housing assignment of his choice. See Olin v. Wakinekona, 461 U.S. 238, 245 (1983); Meachum v.

(PS) Trotter v. Con Am Group

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 16, 2019

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.

Philips North America LLC v. Advanced Imaging Services, Inc.

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 29, 2021

If only a portion or 2 portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, to the extent practicable, the Producing Party 3 also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings … If only a 15 portion or portions of the material on a page qualifies for protection, to the extent practicable, the 16 Producing Party also must clearly identify the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings

(PS) Taft v. Mr. Cooper Group, Inc.

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 11, 2019

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 … Ariz. 1994). 15 Because the complaint clearly establishes that plaintiff lacks standing and is not the “real 16 party in interest” regarding the sale of the subject property, and because she

US Citrus Sci. Council v. U.S. Dep't of Agric.

312 F. Supp. 3d 884 · District Court, E.D. California · Feb 27, 2018

APHIS's own pest assessment adequately establishes a risk giving rise to environmental injury and standing. B. … Here, the Court concludes that its prior determination was clearly erroneous. Therefore, the Court will reconsider the identical issue here. See also Robins v.

Common Sense Party v. Padilla

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 26, 2020

Mandatory preliminary relief should not be issued unless the facts and law clearly 1 favor the moving party. Id. … In that case, “[t]he Ohio Constitution and the Ohio Code 5 establish[ed] the process for proposing an initiative to the State’s electors and impose[d] 6 many requirements for ballot access.” Id. at 806.