Case law

(SS) Eilrich v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 31, 2023

When 19 determining whether the ALJ’s conclusions are supported by substantial evidence, the court 20 reviews the record as a whole, Luther, 891 F.3d at 875, and cannot reverse just because a decision 21 fails to be clearly … Puestow is also a doctor of internal medicine (AT 850) and otherwise 28 appears qualified to opine on medical evidence in this context.

Carson Hybrid Energy Storage, LLC v. Turlock Irrigation District

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 21, 2023

. § 1446, that party 26 bears the burden of establishing jurisdiction exists. … As Carson points out in 2 its reply, what qualifies as “Good Utility Practice” according to FERC is “fact specific and varies 3 by region.”

(PC) Sylvester v. Jones

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

complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are 8 “frivolous, malicious, or fail[] to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,” or that “seek[] 9 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … “[A] judge may dismiss . . . claims which are ‘based on indisputably meritless legal 13 theories’ or whose ‘factual contentions are clearly baseless.’” Jackson v.

(PC) Muhammad v. Ross

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 6, 2021

The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an 10 indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke, 11 490 U.S. at 327. … A 16 showing of merely negligent medical care is not enough to establish a constitutional violation. 17 Frost v. Agnos, 152 F.3d 1124, 1130 (9th Cir. 1998), citing Estelle, 429 U.S. at 105-106.

(SS) Peterson v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. California · Jul 3, 2024

A 19 claimant establishes a prima facie case of qualifying disability once she has carried the burden of 20 proof from step one through step four. 21 Before making the step four … Zurko, 527 U.S. 150, 153 (1999) (comparing the substantial-evidence standard to the deferential 5 clearly erroneous standard). “[T]he threshold for such evidentiary sufficiency is not high.” Biestek, 6 139 S.

(PC) Erbacher v. Robles

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 22, 2023

Hartford, 204 F.3d 1187, 1197 (9th Cir. 2000) (‘In the 4 simplest and most absolute of terms . . . prisoners [have a clearly established Eighth Amendment 5 right] to be free from sexual abuse. . . .’); see also Women … Here, Plaintiff does not clearly 18 allege that any defendant physically touched her in a sexual manner. Somers v.

Ever.Ag, LLC v. Milk Moovement, Inc.

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 13, 2022

(FAC ¶¶ 42, 49.) 11 Defendants argue that the FAC’s allegations regarding 12 an email from CDI sending reports to defendants are insufficient 13 because the email does not clearly … does not require 6 that the confidential information qualify as a ‘trade secret.’” 7 See Integral Dev. Corp. v. Tolat, 675 F.

(PC) Solvey v. Gates

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

“[E]ven gross negligence is insufficient to establish a 13 constitutional violation.” Id. (citing Wood v. … In light of this 27 recommendation, the court declines to consider Defendants’ qualified immunity argument. 28 Therefore, based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 1 1.

(SS) Villa v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 11, 2022

A 3 claimant establishes a prima facie case of qualifying disability once she has carried the burden of 4 proof from step one through step four. 5 Before making the step four determination … Zurko, 527 U.S. 150, 153 (1999) (comparing the substantial-evidence standard to 13 the deferential clearly-erroneous standard). “[T]he threshold for such evidentiary sufficiency is 14 not high.” Biestek, 139 S.

Federal Trade Commission v. Golden Sunrise Nutraceutical, Inc.

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 5, 2020

It qualified for both of these under 23 1 Defendant Tieu was also named as the defendant in a criminal indictment returned by a federal 24 grand … Accord Cliffdale Assocs., 103 F.T.C. 110 (“When the 17 advertisement contains an express claim, the representation itself establishes its meaning.

(HC) Casillas v. Secretary of Corrections

District Court, E.D. California · Sep 3, 2019

Andrade, 538 U.S. 63, 70-71 (2003); 24 Williams, 529 U.S. at 412-413. 25 A state court decision is “contrary to” clearly established federal law “if it applies a rule 26 that … “[I]t is not an unreasonable application of clearly established 27 Federal law for a state court to decline to apply a specific legal rule that has not been squarely 28 established by [the Supreme] Court.”

Carbon Autonomous Robotic Systems Inc. v. Laudando & Assoc.

District Court, E.D. California · Jun 13, 2025

Weckler is qualified to offer an expert opinion in this matter. 27 The court has reviewed his qualifications and agrees that Dr. … Dec. 23, 2024) (finding that the 25 plaintiff’s loss of a first mover advantage qualified as irreparable harm); see also Bio-Rad Lab’ys, 26 Inc. v. 10X Genomics Inc., 967 F.3d 1353, 1378 (Fed.

Alford v. Modesto City School District

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

. § 1983, which provides a private right of 24 action against a person acting under color of state law who deprives a citizen of “any rights, 25 privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.” … “The requisite causal 4 connection can be established not only by some kind of direct personal participation in the 5 deprivation, but also by setting in motion a series of acts by others which the actor knows or 6

S&J Logistics, Inc. v. United National Insurance Company

District Court, E.D. California · Apr 26, 2024

All qualified 6 drivers must be reported immediately upon hiring. Unreported drivers could cause cancellation of policies. … This is the 10 sequence of events that must occur to establish coverage.

Martinez v. The City of Fresno

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

Nor does 20 defendant explain what qualifies as “secured” in the context of abatement locations. … As stated above, the ordinance provides no clear delineation of when a 7 restricted area may be established, how a restricted area is to be established, or when advocates, 8 the press, or the public in general are allowed

Full Circle of Living and Dying v. Sanchez

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

But the defendant California Cemetery and Funeral Bureau has 28 demanded the individual plaintiffs become licensed Funeral Directors and that Full Circle qualify 1 as a Licensed Funeral Establishment, and that plaintiffs … It has standing. 3 The court declines to construe the notice narrowly as the Bureau urges, even as it 4 has failed to clearly articulate what conduct it seeks to prohibit.

(SS) Jones v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. California · Oct 13, 2021

1035, 1038 (9th Cir. 2008). 22 To qualify … established that [the 15 claimant] did not have a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments.”

Fierros v. McAleenan

District Court, E.D. California · Aug 11, 2021

However, the text of the minor exception clearly provides that it applies when 1 “determining the period of unlawful presence in the United States under clause (i).” 8 U.S.C. 2 § 1182(a)(9)(B)(iii)(I) (emphasis added … Plaintiff has not established that Congress intended to 3 provide an exception for minors in this situation. 4 Third, citing to the decision of Landgraf v.

(SS)Perez v. Commissioner of Social Security

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

An ALJ can only find that a claimant’s impairments or combination of 19 impairments are not severe when her conclusion is clearly established by medical evidence. 20 Webb v. … Chater, 172 F.3d 31, 35 22 (1st Cir. 1999) (“As a lay person, ... the ALJ was simply not qualified to interpret raw medical 23 data in functional terms and no medical opinion supported the determination.”); Rohan v.

(PS) Osborne v. Tracy Police Dept

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

Plaintiff asserts she was not a threat to the officers or others, but the video clearly 17 shows plaintiff was a threat to her own safety. … Plaintiff is clearly in distress, and 20 continually leans backwards over the railing.