Case law

(PC) Mekhtarian v. Ortega

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 3, 2021

To establish a claim of deliberate indifference arising from a delay in providing care, a 18 plaintiff must show that the delay was harmful. See Berry v. … The amended complaint should be clearly titled, in 5 bold font, “First Amended Complaint,” reference the appropriate case number, and be an original 6 signed under penalty of perjury.

National Wildlife Federation v. Norton

306 F. Supp. 2d 920 · District Court, E.D. California · Feb 4, 2004

In addition to the mitigation lands purchased under the 0.5:1 ratio, the Plan requires the establishment of a Swainson’s Hawk preserve consisting of 200 contiguous acres to compensate for the loss of a nest tree within the … Formal agency rules announced after notice and comment clearly do receive full deference, while more informal agency determinations may not. See United States v.

Gradford v. Walczack

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

“The requisite causal connection may be established when an 8 official sets in motion a ‘series of acts by others which the actor knows or reasonably should 9 know would cause others to inflict’ constitutional harms.” … The amended complaint should be clearly and boldly 9 titled “First Amended Complaint,” refer to the appropriate case number, and be an original signed 10 under penalty of perjury.

Madison v. OneStaff Medical Limited Liability Company

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 20, 2021

The settlement payment to each individual class member will then be calculated by multiplying 6 the number of qualifying workweeks worked by that individual by the monetary value of each 7 qualifying workweek. … The settlement payment to each individual collective 15 member will then be calculated by multiplying the number of qualifying workweeks worked by that 16 individual by the monetary value of each qualifying workweek.

Campbell

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 7, 2026

The one significant qualifier 11 is that “the remedies must indeed be ‘available’ to the prisoner.” Id. at 639. … Within 60 days of the OOG decision, 23 the inmate may appeal to the Office of Appeals (“OOA”), which must also provide a written 24 decision clearly explaining its reasoning as to each claim.

Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America v. David

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 4, 2021

The 12 Complaint alleged that Section 4 of SB 17 violates the Commerce Clause of the United 13 States Constitution by regulating interstate commerce through a de facto 60-day price 14 freeze nationwide on qualifying … The Court granted that Motion, finding that 21 (1) Governor Brown must be dismissed as a party because he is immune from suit and 22 (2) the Complaint failed to allege facts sufficient to establish PhRMA’s standing.

Lopez v. West Coast Arborists, Inc.

District Court, E.D. California · Feb 1, 2024

section 510, claims under 2 section 510 are completely preempted when there is a qualifying 3 CBA. … This claim clearly does not arise 28 directly from the CBA, but rather from the California Labor Code. 1 And “‘the mere existence of a CBA does not compel preemption of 2 plaintiff’s state law . . .

(PC) Clark v. Ciolli

District Court, E.D. California · Dec 6, 2022

The basis 22 of a Bivens action is some illegal or inappropriate conduct on the part of a federal official or agent 23 that violates a clearly established constitutional right. Baiser v. … On May 1, 2021, Plaintiff contends legal mail was sent to him from a law firm; it too was 20 clearly marked and was opened prior to his “signing the log.”

Elton v. Wilkie

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 7, 2021

A case arises under federal law when a plaintiff establishes that a claim is created 28 by federal law or that a right to relief “requires resolution of a substantial question of federal 1 law.” … Although plaintiff implies that she worked at a VA hospital in Fresno, 14 California, she does not clearly allege that. 15 2.

(PC) Ibarra v. Robles

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 8, 2022

Defendant Winters knew about the risks 6 to Plaintiff’s safety and clearly ignored the high potential for violence. … California’s 8 Government Claims Act establishes certain conditions precedent to the filing of a lawsuit against 9 a public entity. State v.

Erik Pyle v. Chief Justin Gibbs Glenn County Sheriff Officer Doe,1

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

clearly identify (apart from the Monell 26 claim) what other claim(s), if any, Plaintiff brings, what defendants against whom Plaintiff 27 seeks to bring such claim(s), and on what theory of liability. … Mot. at 5-8. 16 42 U.S.C. § 1983 “provides a cause of action for the deprivation of any rights, 17 privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States.” 18 Wilder v.

Winnifred Cathleen Galownia v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 17, 2026

A claimant establishes a prima facie 21 case of qualifying disability once he has carried the burden of proof from step one through step 22 four. … An impairment that manifests only some of those criteria, no matter how severely, does not qualify.” Ford v.

(SS) Scales v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 18, 2025

The burden is on the claimant to establish disability. … established by medical 3 evidence.”

Lake Tahoe Watercraft v. Tahoe Regional Planning

24 F. Supp. 2d 1062 · District Court, E.D. California · Oct 28, 1998

The Compact itself clearly contemplates that State and local ordinances, rules, regulations and policies are subordinate to those of TRPA in this area. … It is also rationally related to establishing minimum water purity and clarity standards as mandated by the Compact.

Bowers v. City of Porterville

District Court, E.D. California · May 9, 2024

Stahl, 254 F.3d 845 (9th Cir. 2001) (dismissal required of in forma 5 pauperis proceedings which seek monetary relief from immune defendants); Cato v. … July 2, 2008). 16 Plaintiff’s shotgun allegations fail to clearly allege conduct that meets the definition of 17 harassment, including that the conduct serves no legitimate purpose.

Conservation Congress v. United States Forest Service

555 F. Supp. 2d 1093 · District Court, E.D. California · May 13, 2008

The STNF LRMP also established a rather inscrutable “Monitoring Action Plan” 6 with three levels of monitoring, ranging from the general to the more specific. AR 4305-06. … This exceeds the minimum standards established in the [LRMP].”)

(PC) Fairchild-Littlefield v. Attinello

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

“[E]ven gross negligence is insufficient to establish a 19 constitutional violation.” Id. (citing Wood v. … The amended complaint should be 23 clearly and boldly titled “Second Amended Complaint,” refer to the appropriate case number, 24 and be an original signed under penalty of perjury. 25 Based

Los Molinos Mutual Water Co. v. Ekdahl

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

Sys. of Higher Educ., 616 F.3d 13 963, 967 (9th Cir. 2010). 14 The Supreme Court has established an important limitation on state sovereign immunity. 15 Va. … As with several of plaintiffs’ arguments presented in opposition to the pending motion, the court clearly rejected this 24 same argument in its Prior Order. (See Doc.

(PC) Downs v. Jiminez

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

complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are 23 “frivolous, malicious, or fail[] to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,” or that “seek[] 24 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … “[A] judge may dismiss . . . claims which are ‘based on indisputably meritless legal 28 theories’ or whose ‘factual contentions are clearly baseless.’” Jackson v.

Barocio

District Court, E.D. California · May 18, 2026

complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner raised claims that are legally 28 “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek 1 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous when it is based on an 5 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 6 490 U.S. at 327.