Case law

(PC) Garces v. Gamboa

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 23, 2021

Cal. 17 Aug. 8, 2017) (“Supervisor defendants are entitled to qualified immunity where the allegations 18 against them are simply ‘bald’ or ‘conclusory’ because such allegations do not ‘plausibly’ 19 establish the supervisors … Abbey, 263 F.3d 1070, 1074-75 (9th Cir. 2001) (en 9 banc) (“[T]here is a clearly established constitutional due process right not to be subjected to 10 criminal charges on the basis of false evidence that was deliberately

(PC) Williams v. California Department of Corrections

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 19, 2019

Neely, 130 F.3d 400 (9th Cir. 1997)). 1 does not qualify for parole consideration pursuant to Proposition 57, and that his only remedy is 2 to proceed under habeas corpus. 3 … The amended complaint should be clearly and boldly 15 titled “Fourth Amended Complaint,” refer to the appropriate case number, and be an original 16 signed under penalty of perjury.

(PC) Harper v. Farhat

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 21, 2025

complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner raised claims that are legally 5 “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 6 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … So, for deliberate indifference to be 17 established, there must be a purposeful act or failure to act on the part of the defendant and 18 resulting harm. Simmons v. G. Arnett, 47 F.4th 927, 933 (9th Cir. 2022).

(PS) Crago v. Lynn

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 30, 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 … In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the 11 court will (1) accept as true all of the factual allegations contained in the complaint, unless they 12 are clearly baseless or fanciful, (2) construe those allegations

Sanborn

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

That bare allegation is not adequate to 16 establish a claim for First Amendment retaliation. See Huskey, 204 F.3d at 899. … immunity and that plaintiff’s claims for punitive damages should be dismissed.

Aguirrie v. Oak Harbor Freight Lines, Inc.

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

there are factually fewer 26 than 100 class members or that the amount in controversy is less 27 than $5 million. 28 Plaintiff’s argument clearly … Knox’s years of experience with human 7 resources and administrative matters at Oak Harbor and her review 8 of records maintained in the ordinary course of business (see id. 9 ¶¶ 2-6), she is well-qualified

(PC) Van Nort v. Martel

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 10, 2020

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where 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. … Navajo County Ariz. 609 19 F.3d 1011, 1017-18 (9th Cir. 2010) (requiring official be subjectively aware of serious medical 20 need and fail to adequately respond to need to establish deliberate indifference).

(PC) Heyligar v. Jones

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 17, 2023

complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner raised claims that are legally 11 “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 12 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … The requisite causal connection between a 20 supervisor’s wrongful conduct and the violation of the prisoner’s constitutional rights can be 21 established in a number of ways, including by demonstrating that a supervisor

(PC) Ellis v. Acob

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 3, 2022

“[A] judge may dismiss . . . claims which are ‘based on indisputably meritless legal 2 theories’ or whose ‘factual contentions are clearly baseless.’” Jackson v. … Smith, 974 F.2d 1050, 1059-60 (9th Cir. 1992)). 21 Deliberate indifference is established only where the defendant subjectively “knows of and 22 disregards an excessive risk to inmate health and safety.”

Mull

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

Courts start with the presumption that private conduct does not 11 constitute governmental action, and a plaintiff bears the burden of establishing state action. See 12 Florer v. … John Ascuaga’s Nugget, 548 F.3d 892, 900 (9th Cir. 17 2008) (conclusory allegations are insufficient to establish state action).

(PC) Drake v. Mehta

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 21, 2025

admitted and qualify or deny the rest. … Although plaintiff does not identify the surgery, in request no. 3 plaintiff 22 clearly refers to the surgery on plaintiff’s eye discussed in the amended complaint. 23 Request no. 4 asked, “Admit that the defendant

Mitchell v. Bikoba

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

14 A temporary restraining order is an extraordinary and temporary “fix” that the court may 15 issue without notice to the adverse party if, in an affidavit or verified complaint, the movant 16 “clearly … added). 5 Moreover, although Plaintiff also cites § 1983, she fails to present a viable § 1983 claim. 6 “Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983 provides a cause of action for the ‘deprivation of any rights, privileges, or 7 immunities

(PC) Thompson v. Cagle

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 13, 2019

or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are 27 legally “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or 28 that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … McMillian, 503 U.S. 1, 8, (1992) (alteration in original) 21 (quoting Wilson, 501 U.S. at 298, 303). 22 “[P]risoners have a clearly established Eighth Amendment right to be free

(PC) Abalos v. Lizarraga

District Court, E.D. California · May 3, 2022

12 establish a material issue of fact conclusively in its favor. … Qualified Immunity 9 In light of these findings, the undersigned declines to address the issue of qualified 10 immunity.

(PC) Murphy v. Rudas

District Court, E.D. California · Feb 10, 2020

By establishing the existence of a serious medical need, a prisoner satisfies the 15 objective requirement for proving an Eighth Amendment violation. Farmer v. … Plaintiff is advised that in an amended complaint he must 16 clearly identify each defendant and the action that defendant took that violated his constitutional 17 rights.

(PC) Rood v. Shasta County Jail Medical Staff

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 31, 2020

or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally 14 “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 15 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Relevant Law 6 A viable First Amendment claim for retaliation must establish the following five elements: 7 “(1) An assertion that a state actor took some adverse action against

(PS) Reif v. Gray

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 2, 2025

forma pauperis 5 proceeding, and must order dismissal of the case if it is “frivolous or malicious,” “fails to 6 state a claim on which relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief against a 7 defendant who is immune … In 10 reviewing a complaint under this standard, the court accepts as true the factual 11 allegations contained in the complaint, unless they are clearly baseless or fanciful, and 12 construes those allegations in the

(PC) Jones v. Manu

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 21, 2024

The magistrate judge found Plaintiff’s alleged “denial of pain medication 14 to treat swelling is insufficient to establish Plaintiff is in imminent danger of serious physical 15 injury.” … There is clearly no showing of bias by this Court.

(PS) Ackers v. California Employment Development Department

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

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 … In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the 11 court will (1) accept as true all of the factual allegations contained in the complaint, unless they 12 are clearly baseless or fanciful, (2) construe those allegations

(PC) Reed v. Peery

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

complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are 7 “frivolous, malicious, or fail[] to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,” or that “seek[] 8 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … “[A] judge may dismiss . . . claims which are ‘based on indisputably meritless legal 12 theories’ or whose ‘factual contentions are clearly baseless.’” Jackson v.