Case law

Diviacchi v. Stallings

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 5, 2025

Amendment immunity. 14 “Eleventh Amendment immunity extends to state agencies and other governmental entities 15 that can be viewed as ‘arms of the State.’” … This agency relationship is sufficient to establish that Defendants are in privity with the 12 California Bar.

Chevron Chemical Co. v. Costle

443 F. Supp. 1024 · District Court, N.D. California · Jan 25, 1978

First, Section 3(c)(1) establishes the procedure for making application for registration of pesticides. … It may well be that some costly and time-consuming tests and the resulting data would not qualify for confidential treatment.

Gay v. Waiters' & Dairy Lunchmen's Union, Local No. 30

489 F. Supp. 282 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 6, 1980

Thus there was no established procedure for giving public notice of all job openings. … Current or most recent job activity Describe clearly this person’s chief job activity or business last week, if any. If he had more than one job, describe the one at which he worked the most hours.

United States v. Shafi

252 F. Supp. 3d 787 · District Court, N.D. California · May 3, 2017

That is not the case here, where the intent of Congress in passing subsection (h) is clearly established by an extensive legislative history. See, e.g., H.R. Rep. … . *798 Because the scope of the section is clearly established by the plain language of the statute after the addition óf (h), as well as the clear , legislative history, and'because the scope is unaffected by whether subsection

Tucker v. Day

District Court, N.D. California · Jul 13, 2020

review, the court must identify any 7 cognizable claims and dismiss any claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim 8 upon which relief may be granted or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Furthermore, supervisor defendants are entitled to qualified immunity 6 || where the allegations against them are simply “bald” or “conclusory” because such 7 || allegations do not “plausibly” establish the supervisors

Miller v. United States

813 F. Supp. 715 · District Court, N.D. California · Sep 15, 1992

Sections 7432 and' -7433 are clear waivers of sovereign immunity. 4. … The House Conference Committee clearly delineated when section 7433 would apply as well as when it would not: (See 6 U.S.

In Re Extreme Networks, Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigation

573 F. Supp. 2d 1228 · District Court, N.D. California · Sep 23, 2008

According to Extreme’s certificate of incorporation, Extreme directors are immunized to the fullest extent permitted by the Delaware General Corporation Law. Decl. of Joseph E. … However, Grucel’s inability to plead facts sufficient to excuse demand should not prejudice the shareholders he is no longer qualified to represent.

Pittman

District Court, N.D. California · Oct 23, 2025

Pittman has not shown 14 that the facts and law clearly favor him under a § 3604(f)(3)(A) theory. 15 Because Mr. … Pittman has established that he is unable to pay the Court’s filing fee due to a 24 lack of employment, savings, or other financial resources.

Straw v. Facebook

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 8, 2025

As with the deficiencies in alleging a § 1983 12 claim discussed above, here again the short answer is no. 13 Title II of the ADA provides that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason … There is nothing in the pleading to 25 suggest that Facebook is immune from such relief. 26 Accordingly, the Court determines that Plaintiff’s Complaint satisfies the “immunity” 27 prong

Lilly v. Jamba Juice Co.

308 F.R.D. 231 · District Court, N.D. California · Sep 18, 2014

But it imposes only the “limited burden” of establishing “a single significant *242 question of law or fact.” Mazza v. Am. Honda Motor Co., 666 F.3d 581, 589 (9th Cir.2012). Plaintiffs have established commonality. … Proving whether the challenged representations qualify under this standard will not require delving into issues specific to each consumer.

Lee v. Foothill-De Anza Community College District

District Court, N.D. California · May 7, 2024

immunity,” which protects them “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly 26 established statutory … Lee clearly pleads that she is a member of a protected class (race) and was 17 qualified for her position. So her claim turns on whether Dr.

Young v. Allison

District Court, N.D. California · Apr 15, 2022

As to Young’s California 1999, U.S 27 Government, and Voong actions, it is well-established that a dismissal for failure to state a 1 claim … He 25 has failed to (i) pay the filing fee; (ii) show that any of the strikes do not qualify under 26 section 1915(g); (iii) show that he qualifies for the imminent danger exception; or (iv) 27 otherwise show cause

Bodri v. GoPro, Inc.

252 F. Supp. 3d 912 · District Court, N.D. California · May 1, 2017

The September 28 price cut was clearly not a secret to the public. … Such language was sufficient to establish safe harbor protection.

Vargas v. Lopez

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 30, 2025

However, the Court will not include the following language: “Defendants 3 also contend that Officer Lopez-Ortega and Lieutenant Whitman entitled to qualified immunity. 4 Defendants have the burden of proof on their … Defendants’ sole affirmative defense is 5 qualified immunity, which is for the Court, not the jury, to resolve.

United States ex rel. Krawitt v. Infosys Techs. Ltd.

372 F. Supp. 3d 1078 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 12, 2019

Second, Apple asserts that Krawitt cannot establish scienter. Third, Apple contends that Krawitt fails to plead facts establishing the materiality of the invitation letters. … The Court's previous order dismissing Krawitt's claims relied upon a three-prong test developed by the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") for what constitutes business qualifying for a B-1 visa: (1) [T]he alien clearly

Cunha v. IntelliCheck, LLC

254 F. Supp. 3d 1124 · District Court, N.D. California · May 26, 2017

If the report qualifies as an “investigative consumer report,” the entity that procures the report must provide the consumer with a written summary of their rights pursuant to Section 1681g(c). Id. § 1681d(a)(l). … The consumer report clearly lists a report date of “05-13-2016,” and an order date of “05-06-2016.” ECF No. 40-1 at 4.

Viceroy Gold Corp. v. Aubry

858 F. Supp. 1007 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 21, 1994

These provisions clearly evince a congressional intent to protect a worker’s right freely to choose between unionization and non-unionization. … Nor do they have any but the most indirect effect on the right of self-organization established in the Act.

Hayes v. Josey

District Court, N.D. California · Nov 18, 2019

claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim 25 upon which relief may be granted or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Furthermore, 17 supervisor defendants are entitled to qualified immunity where the allegations against them 18 are simply “bald” or “conclusory” because such allegations do not “plausibly” establish the 19 supervisors

Rodgers v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

655 F. Supp. 2d 1081 · District Court, N.D. California · Sep 8, 2009

MetLife concluded that there was insufficient proof that Rodgers qualified under the Plan’s definition of disability. … Because MetLife denied Rodgers’ claim under the Short-Term Disability Policy, it never determined whether she qualified for benefits under the Long-Term Disability Policy.

In Re Oracle Securities Litigation

852 F. Supp. 1437 · District Court, N.D. California · Jun 14, 1994

The SLC’s reasoning is clearly detailed in its report. Only a brief summary of the SLC’s rationale need be reprised here. … All three of these firms were qualified to represent the class against Andersen.