Case law

Nicholas Services, LLC v. Glassdoor, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 21, 2024

After a plaintiff establishes the first two prongs, the burden shifts to the defendant to establish that the exercise of personal jurisdiction would be unfair or unreasonable, and to do so, the defendant must make a “compelling … The court stated, “an encouragement test would inflate the meaning of ‘development’ to the point of eclipsing the immunity from publisher-liability that Congress established,” and held that “because [Defendant] did not

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.

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

Aboushaban v. Mueller

475 F. Supp. 2d 943 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 23, 2007

Defendants argue that plaintiff did not prevail because the USCIS voluntarily agreed to adjudicate plaintiffs application once he submitted a replacement Supplemental Form (Documentation of Immunization) to the Medical Examination … Here, the first two elements are clearly met, and plaintiff avers in a declaration that his net worth did not exceed two million dollars at the time of filing. See Declaration of Mohamed Aboushaban's ¶ 1.

Cupp v. Smith

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 9, 2020

Since 27 plaintiff failed to state a prima facie claim premised on Smith’s allegedly unlawful search 1 court finds that its resolution of Smith’s alternative argument that he is entitled to qualified 2 immunity is … However, the 22 court has not made any decision on whether Smith would be entitled to qualified 23 immunity or Sonoma County may be held liable under Monell.

Fernandez v. Montgomery

182 F. Supp. 3d 991 · District Court, N.D. California · Apr 19, 2016

Id. at 411 , 120 S.Ct. 1495 . 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1) restricts the source of “clearly established” law to *1000 the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence. … For that reason, the Court again notes that Petitioner fails to cite clearly established law constitutionally prohibiting a trial court from instructing a jury on an irrelevant but accurate statement of state law.

Environmental Law Fund v. Volpe

340 F. Supp. 1328 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 22, 1972

On the other hand, the Act and the CEQ Guidelines clearly distinguish between projects initiated prior to January 1, 1970 and projects initiated after that date. … It would seem that the first statement requires an opposite, or at least a qualified, conclusion in the second statement.

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

Hurst v. Buczek Enterprises, LLC

870 F. Supp. 2d 810 · District Court, N.D. California · May 2, 2012

They therefore qualified for the § 7053 exemption from the § 7031 bar, even if § 2750.5 did not apply. Id. … If the foreign corporation plaintiff complies ... by qualifying and paying fees, penalties and taxes, it may maintain the action.

Westport Insurance Corp. v. California Casualty Management Co.

249 F. Supp. 3d 1164 · District Court, N.D. California · Apr 7, 2017

California *1176 Casualty presents several unpersuasive arguments that its policy qualifies as excess coverage over all other available polices. A. … The plain text of the policies clearly indicates that California Casualty’s policy triggers upon exhaustion of Westport’s Primary coverage.

Rovio Entertainment Ltd. v. Royal Plush Toys, Inc.

907 F. Supp. 2d 1086 · District Court, N.D. California · Nov 6, 2012

Indeed, Plaintiffs motion papers do not contain a separate section devoted to establishing that an ex parte seizure order is warranted. … As discussed above, Plaintiff has not established that Defendants are predisposed to destroy or hide evidence.

Sunbeam Corp. v. Payless Drug Stores

113 F. Supp. 31 · District Court, N.D. California · May 15, 1953

It is true that the Schwegmann case, supra, held that the Miller-Tydings Act created but “a limited immunity” to the proscriptions of the Sherman Act. … Prior discussion has established that plaintiff’s contracts are lawful.

Munoz v. Gipson

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 19, 2024

immunity. … immunity.

Cable Electric Products, Inc. v. Genmark, Inc.

582 F. Supp. 93 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 29, 1984

As will appear below, the Court finds that, although defendant cannot establish that its device does not infringe plaintiffs patent, defendant does meet its burden of proof in establishing the obviousness of plaintiff’s claimed … Of the items defendant cites, about a dozen prior patents clearly meet these standards, and are sufficient to decide this motion. 3 United States Letters Patent Nos.

Tuan Anh Le v. Bank of New York Mellon

152 F. Supp. 3d 1200 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 23, 2015

Rather, it says that he qualified for consideration under a loan modification review program, that “we encourage you to apply” for that program, and that Plaintiff may ultimately not qualify for a modification. … Furthermore, as discussed in the preceding paragraph, the letter did not state that Plaintiff qualified for a modification. Rather, it stated that he qualified to apply for a modification.

Fink-Carver v. Kuhn

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 14, 2024

In its ruling, the Court also denied qualified 2 immunity for Ofc. Kuhn as to the entry issue (he was the only individually named Defendant). … denial of qualified immunity as to the force (canine contact) used on Plaintiff Fink-Carver. 6 SeeCity of Pleasant Hill et al. v.

McNeary-Calloway v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.

863 F. Supp. 2d 928 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 26, 2012

Plaintiffs contend that this language “clearly” establishes that “settlement services include hazard insurance and other insurance ‘required by the lender as a condition of the loan.’ ” Id. … Therefore, to establish standing under the UCL a plaintiff must “(1) establish a loss or deprivation of money or property sufficient to qualify as injury in fact, i.e., economic injury, and (2) show that that economic injury

Nicholson v. Sando

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 20, 2020

However, he has managed, in pro se, to clearly articulate 11 his claims and the Eighth Amendment issues involved are not complex. … Defendants are advised that summary judgment cannot be granted, nor 20 qualified immunity found, if material facts are in dispute.

Holguin v. Harris

480 F. Supp. 1171 · District Court, N.D. California · Nov 14, 1979

They clearly were controllable, as noted at various times throughout the medical reports. As such, they cannot serve as a basis for a complaint. … Plaintiff has had a history of laboring positions, for which he is no longer physically qualified. Both reporting physicians would restrict plaintiff to light and sedentary work.

Schoenmann ex rel. Estate of UCBH Holdings, Inc. v. Federal Deposit Insurance

7 F. Supp. 3d 1009 · District Court, N.D. California · Jan 6, 2014

VIA Tech., Inc., 204 F.R.D. 450, 452 (N.D.Cal. 2001) (finding declaration of non-party was “clearly work product right up until the moment it was filed.”). … Rule 612 is inapplicable in this instance and none of the decisions the FDIC-Receiver have cited in support of its argument establish otherwise.