Case law

Baptiste v. Hatton

District Court, N.D. California · Nov 6, 2019

Nor do the cases and statutes cited by plaintiff establish a right to 17 counsel in this particular case. Neither the Americans with Disabilities Act or Rehabilitation Act 18 governs this action. … Neither the need for discovery, nor the 3 fact that the pro se litigant would be better served with the assistance of counsel, necessarily 4 qualify the issues involved as complex.

Dana v. Hershey Co.

180 F. Supp. 3d 652 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 29, 2016

That actual, particularized injury is sufficient to establish standing. C. … To forestall an action under the unfair competition law, another provision must actually “bar” the action or clearly permit the conduct.

Mulato v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

76 F. Supp. 3d 929 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 19, 2014

Despite that, they were never offered a permanent modification, nor were they told that they did not *952 qualify. Id. at 882 . … Furthermore, “the mere existence of one non-frivolous claim” in a complaint does not immunize it from Rule 11 sanctions. Id. at 677 (quoting Townsend v. Holman Consulting Corp., 929 F.2d 1358, 1364 (9th Cir.1990)).

Mirkooshesh v. Elie

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 26, 2023

she was denied credit despite being qualified. … Nowhere do the plaintiffs 4 allege that they applied for credit with the defendants, qualified for credit, or were denied credit 5 despite being qualified. See Harrison, 2019 WL 2515582, at *3.

Sutton v. California Department of Parks and Recreation

District Court, N.D. California · Jan 17, 2025

Parks argues that it is immune to liability based on the Unruh Act under 5 California Government Code section 815, which states that “[e]xcept as otherwise provided by 6 statute[,] . . . … That said, the 1 Court also rejects Parks’ immunity argument, since the Court believes Unruh Act liability is 2 governed by California Government Code section 815.6. See Cal.

Zizi v. Cuccinelli

District Court, N.D. California · Jul 7, 2021

The concept of harmless error is constrained in the context of agency review and 3 may be employed “only when a mistake of the administrative body clearly had no bearing on the 4 procedure used or the substance of decision … The Government argues that the AAO was correct 7 because “[t]he requirement to demonstrate that a publication qualifies as major media is a long- 8 standing one that has been acknowledged by several courts.”

Peak Health Center v. Dorfman

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 24, 2020

If credited, they establish only that Peak Health’s 14 products contain CBD and no detectable THC, and that some hops plant (it is not clear which one) 15 contains no THC. … Such motion must be supported 21 by a declaration or other evidence establishing the amount of fees and costs requested.4 Peak 22 Health may file a response to Mr.

Free Freehand Corp. v. Adobe Systems Inc.

852 F. Supp. 2d 1171 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 10, 2012

Areeda & Herbert Hovenkamp, Antitrust Law § 315c (3d ed.2007) (hereinafter “Areeda & Hovenkamp”) (DOJ “lacks the power to immunize transactions generally” and DOJ clearance “cannot bind a court, a private plaintiff, or the … “[I]njury, although causally related to an antitrust violation, nevertheless will not qualify as ‘antitrust injury’ unless it is attributable to an anti-competitive aspect of the practice under scrutiny, since it is inimical

Alvarez v. Robertson

District Court, N.D. California · Jul 13, 2022

A federal habeas court making 22 the “unreasonable application” inquiry should ask whether the state court’s application of clearly 23 established federal law was “objectively unreasonable.” … established Supreme Court precedent.

State v. Ross

358 F. Supp. 3d 965 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 6, 2019

Lost federal funding, no matter the magnitude, qualifies as an injury-in-fact. Czyzewski , 137 S.Ct. at 983 . … The record in this case has clearly established *1051 that including the citizenship question on the 2020 Census is fundamentally counterproductive to the goal of obtaining accurate citizenship data about the public.

Dekker v. Vivint Solar, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · May 5, 2022

L.R. 79-5). 19 “Reference to a stipulation or protective order that allows a party to designate certain 20 documents as confidential is not sufficient to establish that a document, or portions thereof, are 21 … These and other portions of the 15 document clearly do not qualify for sealing.

National Audubon Society v. Davis

144 F. Supp. 2d 1160 · District Court, N.D. California · Nov 30, 2000

While water districts themselves are the parties that would be most clearly injured under the trappers’ theory, no water district has joined this suit. … The state defendants here raise the defense of immunity. But in light of Ex Parte Young that argument is really one of plaintiffs' alleged lack of standing and ripeness. 6 .

San Francisco Baykeeper v. Sunnyvale

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 12, 2022

Evid. 702 advisory committee’s note 8 to 2000 amendment. 9 Rule 702 “clearly contemplates some degree of regulation of the subjects and theories 10 about which … Wren is qualified to render those 2 opinions.

Berkeley Homeless Union v. City of Berkeley

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 14, 2025

Disabilities Act (“ADA”) requires before the City may evict disabled and unhoused individuals 5 when clearing an encampment, and whether the City has complied with these requirements. 6 Under Title II of the ADA, “no qualified … Plaintiffs have clearly shown that immediate and irreparable injury—specifically 9 the removal of Plaintiffs and their belongings from the place they are now living—will occur 10 before a hearing can be held on a motion

Doe v. Roblox Corporation

District Court, N.D. California · May 9, 2022

See id. at 1163. 7 “The majority of federal circuits have interpreted the CDA to establish broad federal 8 immunity to any cause of action that would make service providers … And this case is far afield from the “prototypical service 11 qualifying for CDA immunity,” which “is an online messaging board (or bulletin board) on which 12 Internet subscribers post comments and respond to comments

In re Nat'l Collegiate Athletic Ass'n Athletic Grant-In-Aid Cap Antitrust Litig.

375 F. Supp. 3d 1058 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 8, 2019

(Heckman) at 597 (if a student-athlete received "another $ 10,000" then the "student is clearly better off. No question about it"). Defendants also proffer lay witness testimony on the benefits of college education. … O'Bannon II , 802 F.3d at 1072 (affirming the district court's rejection of competitive balance and increased output procompetitive justifications because the NCAA "offered no meaningful argument that those findings were clearly

Fox v. Uribe

District Court, N.D. California · Oct 17, 2022

Tuvera, and Tereasa Uribe were 1 summary judgment on the grounds that the undisputed material facts show they did not 2 violate Plaintiff’s constitutional rights and based on qualified immunity. Dkt. … immunity argument.

Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Lutz

271 F. Supp. 2d 1196 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 10, 2003

For Lutz’s understatement of income to qualify as fraudulent under these terms, he must have knowingly and intentionally misrepresented his true income. See Bradford v. … The text of these provisions clearly states that a failure to comply with the law must be knowing in order to warrant termination.

CALIFORNIA STATE EMP. ASS'N v. State of Cal.

724 F. Supp. 717 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 3, 1989

Moss' analysis cited various factors for this decision, including the smaller size of the nursing bureau and the high supply of qualified nurses. Id. Although Mr. … Dickens' "costs of living" hypothesis: the Personnel Board clearly calculated one cost of living, with some accounting for geographical differences. Ex.

Wilkins v. Smith

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 14, 2025

review, the court must identify any cognizable claims and dismiss any claims 22 that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted or seek 23 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Similarly, a showing of nothing more than a difference of medical opinion 14 as to the need to pursue one course of treatment over another is insufficient, as a matter of law, to 15 establish deliberate indifference