Case law

McMillan v. County of Shasta

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 27, 2021

Rather, the allegations indicate Chief Lowe was a 21 “mere bystander,” for which the Boyd Court clearly instructed 22 liability cannot attach. … Because 8 the claim is dismissed on these grounds, the Court does not reach 9 City Defendants’ additional arguments regarding qualified 10 immunity.

Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations v. United States Department of the Interior

996 F. Supp. 2d 887 · District Court, E.D. California · Feb 6, 2014

Doc. 68-1 at 9. 9 Plaintiffs’ contention on this point is belied by the EA itself, which clearly considers an alternative that would reduce contract water quantities. … However, alternatives requiring legislative action will qualify for inclusion in an EIS “only in very rare circumstances.” City of Sausalito v.

(PC) Harris v. Eu

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

The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if it: (1) is frivolous or 27 malicious; (2) fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; or (3) seeks monetary relief 28 from a defendant who is immune … The court 5 may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an indisputably meritless legal 6 theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Id. at 327.

(PC) Razaq v. California Department of Corrections

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 29, 2020

As a basic 26 matter, the complaint does not clearly state what happened, when it happened or who was 27 involved. … establish that policy.”

(PC) Kendrix v. Sacramento Main Jail

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

“[A] judge may dismiss . . . claims which are ‘based on indisputably meritless legal 12 theories’ or whose ‘factual contentions are clearly baseless.’” Jackson v. … An authorized deprivation is one carried out pursuant to established 1 state procedures, regulations, or statutes. Piatt v.

Martin

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 26, 2026

A district judge shall modify or set aside 13 an order when it is “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” 28 U.S.C. § 626(b)(1)(A); Fed. R. Civ. 14 P. 72(a); Khrapunov v. … Plaintiffs’ objection that Schneider 3 acted under “color of right” is likewise insufficient to support the legal conclusion that the 4 defendants are public officials, or that they otherwise qualify as state actors within

(HC) Noble v. Trate

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

Specifically, Petitioner asserts that his Indiana Code convictions are not categorically 24 qualified predicates under Descamps v. United States, 570 U.S. 254 (2013) and Mathis v. … pursuant to 25 26 27 3 “[W]here intervening Supreme Court authority is clearly

(HC) Noble v. Trate

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

Specifically, Petitioner asserts that his Indiana Code convictions are not categorically 24 qualified predicates under Descamps v. United States, 570 U.S. 254 (2013) and Mathis v. … pursuant to 25 26 27 3 “[W]here intervening Supreme Court authority is clearly

(PS) Robinson v. Butte County

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

The undisputed evidence in this case establishes that 14 Plaintiff caused three documents to be sent to Duran. … Finally, this Court’s records clearly reflect that Plaintiff has been afforded 3 || every opportunity to be heard.

(PC) Chinsami v. Cueva

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

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 3 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 4 490 U.S. at 327. … An authorized deprivation is one 25 carried out pursuant to established state procedures, regulations, or statutes. Piatt v. McDougall, 26 773 F.2d 1032, 1036 (9th Cir. 1985); see also Knudson v.

Saradeth

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 19, 2025

dismiss the complaint, or any portion 25 of the complaint, if the complaint “is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which 26 relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Finally, our cases have clearly held 25 that an inmate need not prove that an injury resulted from sexual assault in order to maintain an excessive force claim under the Eighth Amendment.

Rocky Mountain Farmers Union v. Goldstene

719 F. Supp. 2d 1170 · District Court, E.D. California · Jun 16, 2010

California is the only state that qualifies for the Section 209 waiver or Section 211(c)(4)(A) preemption exemption. See, Davis v. E.P.A, 348 F.3d 772 , 777 n. 1 (9th Cir.2003); Engine Mftrs. Ass’n v. … In their complaints, plaintiffs clearly allege that California’s LCFS conflicts with Section 211(o) of the Clean Air Act.

Siegenthaler

District Court, E.D. California · Feb 12, 2026

The 4 complaint must clearly and fully set forth “who is being sued, for what relief, and on what 5 theory, with enough detail to guide discovery.” McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1178 6 (9th Cir. 1996). … When a defendant challenges service, the plaintiff bears the burden of 18 establishing that service was valid under Rule 4. See Brockmeyer v. May, 383 F.3d 798, 19 801 (9th Cir. 2004).

Broderick Warfield v. AX9 Security Services

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

IFP statute requires federal courts to dismiss a case if the action is legally 21 “frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks 22 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … The amended complaint must clearly set forth the relief 4 requested.

Prieto Automotive, Inc. v. Volvo Car USA, LLC

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 14, 2024

They clearly had rights under the APA as signatories, unlike the plaintiff in Domino’s Pizza, 21 whose corporation was the contracting party. … But it is also possible, consistent with the 4 FAC’s allegations, that Volvo found Haron more qualified given these circumstances or 5 considered other factors under which Haron was more qualified.

(PC) De La Cruz v. Superior Court of California

District Court, E.D. California · Nov 6, 2020

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. Neitzke, 7 490 U.S. at 327. … In order to state a claim for the denial of court access, a prisoner must 27 establish that he suffered an actual injury. Id. at 349.

(PC) Charles Davis v. Hanford Police Department

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

“But if the plaintiff establishes the absence of probable cause, ‘then the 11 Mt. … The amended complaint should be clearly and boldly 23 titled “First Amended Complaint,” refer to the appropriate case number, and be an original 24 signed under penalty of perjury.

Chestnut

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 20, 2026

While respondent also references petitioner’s “prior release in the discretion of the 26 government,” there is no evidence establishing that petitioner was previously detained by 27 immigration officers. … Rodriguez, 583 U.S. 281, 288 (2018). 15 While the text of section 1225(b)(2)(A) limits its reach to applicants “seeking admission,” 16 section 1226(a) does not include the same qualifying language.

(PC) Calderon v. Covello

District Court, E.D. California · Nov 9, 2023

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous when it is based on an 19 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 20 490 U.S. at 327. … To establish a violation of this 22 duty, a prisoner must “show that the officials acted with deliberate indifference to threat of serious 23 harm or injury to an inmate.”

Paldara

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

Even gross negligence is insufficient to establish deliberate indifference to serious 10 medical needs. See Wood v. … To establish 15 a violation of the Eighth Amendment, the prisoner must “show that the officials acted with 16 deliberate indifference . . .” Labatad v. Corrs.