Case law

(PC) Calloway v. CDCR

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 9, 2021

identify any 24 cognizable claims and dismiss any portion of the complaint that is frivolous or malicious, fails to 25 state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is 26 immune … “The requisite causal 3 connection may [also] be established when a state official sets in motion a ‘series of acts by others 4 which the actor knows or reasonably should know would cause others to inflict’ constitutional

Kang v. Credit Bureau Connection, Inc.

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

Second, Kang has shown himself to be 10 qualified to serve as class representative by retaining counsel, conferring with his attorneys 11 regarding the matter, and participating in discovery. Doc. … Zinser, 253 F.3d at 1192. 25 Kang argues that class treatment is clearly superior, and Credit Bureau does not directly 26 address the issue in opposition.4 The Court finds the Rule 23(b)(3) factors weigh in favor

(PC) Medina Vasquez v. Sheriff

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 24, 2021

As pleaded, Plaintiff’s conclusory 19 allegations are clearly insufficient as a matter of law. See, e.g., George v. Uribe, No. 11-CV-70 JLS 20 (RBB), 2012 WL 993243, at *6 (S.D. Cal. … However, the mere violation of a prison rule or regulation does not necessarily establish a 8 constitutional violation.

(PC) Mois v. Ciolli

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

portion 23 thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a 24 claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is 25 immune … The amended complaint should be clearly titled, in 11 bold font, “First Amended Complaint,” reference the appropriate case number, and be an original

Crownholm v. Moore

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 24, 2023

(establish again), or retrace (trace 24 again). … Indeed, the Act’s text is sufficiently clear t`h at plaintiffs should have known their conduct 2 qualified as land surveying under California law and is prohibited because plaintiffs were not 3 licensed or exempted, and

Aqualliance v. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

287 F. Supp. 3d 969 · District Court, E.D. California · Feb 15, 2018

While several counties in the Sacramento Valley have established GMPs, other areas have not. AR 25671. … On this issue, the Court finds Plaintiffs have met their burden of establishing no performance standard exists.

(DP) Dickey v. Davis

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

an 19 unreasonable application of, [the] clearly established Federal law.” … No. 142 at 159-60.) 5 However, Petitioner does not point to any clearly established Supreme Court law as a 6 basis for relief.

Noem

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 13, 2026

6 Section 1225(b)(2)(A) provides that “in the case of an alien who is an applicant for 7 admission, if the examining immigration officer determines that an alien seeking admission is 8 not clearly … 4 5 J.E.H.G., 2025 WL 3523108, at *11–12. 6 Here, there is nothing in the record before this Court establishing

Avalos v. Red Mountain Asset Fund I, LLC

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 22, 2021

According to the Plaintiff, at the time of his visits to 1 Defendant’s facility and prior to instituting this action, Plaintiff suffered from a “qualified disability” 2 under the ADA. (Id.) … The Court finds that the plaintiff has failed to meet his burden of establishing that this is a 18 barrier.

Guillen v. Schleicher

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 6, 2024

However, the Court will allow Plaintiff the opportunity to amend his complaint to allege 7 facts that establish that each claim arising out of the May 27, 2021 incident is not time-barred or that 8 tolling applies, if … To 7 state a claim for imposition of excessive force, Plaintiff must allege facts showing that he (1) suffered 8 some injury which (2) resulted from force that was clearly excessive to the need for force; (3) the 9

(PC) Vernon v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 23, 2024

Section 15 1109 establishes personal liability for an ERISA fiduciary who breaches duties that result in 16 losses to the plan. See 29 U.S.C. § 1109(a). … “To qualify as ‘equitable relief,’ both ‘(1) the basis for the 8 plaintiff’s claim and (2) the nature of the underlying remedies sought’ must be equitable rather 9 than legal.” Depot, Inc. v.

(HC) Garner v. Cates

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 1, 2021

established federal law. … Legal Standard 3 The law on sufficiency of the evidence is clearly established by the United States Supreme 4 Court.

(HC) Williams v. Lizarraga

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

Woodall, 572 U.S. 415, 419 (2014). 10 “Clearly established federal law” consists of the governing legal principles in the 11 decisions of the United States Supreme Court when the state court issued its decision. … A decision is “contrary 14 to” clearly established federal law if the state court either: (1) applied a rule that contradicts the 15 governing law set forth by Supreme Court case law; or (2) reached a different result

(SS) Compean v. Commissioner of Social Security

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

The party appealing 24 the ALJ’s decision generally bears the burden of establishing that it was harmed. … As 25 is the case here, the Appeals Council’s decision does not always address all relevant factors in the 26 applicable regulations nor clearly state whether it did or did not consider the additional records. 27 See

(PC)Fletcher v. Clendenin

District Court, E.D. California · Mar 24, 2022

Although Plaintiff's complaint is relatively short, it is not a plain statement of his claims. 17 As a basic matter, the complaint does not clearly … by a...policymaker possessed 23 with final authority to establish that policy.”

(SS) Dean v. Commissioner of Social Security

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

A 10 claimant establishes a prima facie case of qualifying disability once she has carried the burden of 11 proof from step one through step four. 12 B. … Zurko, 23 527 U.S. 150, 153 (1999) (comparing the substantial-evidence standard to the deferential clearly- 24 erroneous standard). “[T]he threshold for such evidentiary sufficiency is not high.”

Chestnut

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

United States, 689 F.3d 975, 984 (9th Cir. 2012) (decision to detain noncitizen pending resolution of immigration proceedings fell within discretionary 28 function exception to waiver of sovereign immunity under Federal … “But while the existence of some threshold of per se due process violation may 13 be ‘undisputed,’ . . . it has also never been clearly delineated in the context of immigration 14 detention.” Doe v. Becerra, 704 F.

(PC) Stone v. Pfieffer

District Court, E.D. California · Jan 29, 2024

Federal law recognizes a qualified 6 privilege for official information. See Kerr v. United States Dist. Ct. for N.D. Cal., 511 F.2d 192, 7 198 (9th Cir. 1975). … If the opposing 11 party fails to meet the threshold burden requirement of establishing cause to apply the privilege, 12 the privilege will be overruled. Chism v.

(PC) Caruso v. Hill

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 15, 2020

Pennington, 381 U.S. 657 19 (1965), which held that private actors are immune from antitrust liability for petitioning the 20 government. Sanders v. Brown, 504 F.3d 903, 912 (9th Cir. 2007). … Relatedly, the amended 16 complaint should also clearly identify which forms of relief she is attempting to obtain from which 17 Defendants and in what capacity.

(PC) Spence v. Johnson

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

Judicial 25 rulings alone almost never establish bias or partiality. Liteky v. … “Retaliation against prisoners for their exercise of this right is itself a 27 constitutional violation, and prohibited as a matter of ‘clearly established law’.”