Case law

Ravens v. Iftikar

174 F.R.D. 651 · District Court, N.D. California · Jan 7, 1997

Among other changes, these amendments established new procedures for selecting a lead plaintiff and counsel to represent a class in federal securities class actions. … Under the new system, it is expected that the most adequate representative of the class will emerge from a competition among all qualified investors.

Bush v. Rust-Oleum Corporation

District Court, N.D. California · Jan 4, 2021

Non-toxic 20 claims should be clearly and prominently qualified to the extent necessary to avoid deception.11 21 22 … be clearly understood by consumers.”14 It explained: 10 [A] “non-toxic” claim conveys that a product is non-toxic for both humans and for the environment generally.

Thomas v. Brown

513 F. Supp. 2d 1124 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 21, 2006

Hill is clearly established law in the parole context for purposes of § 2254(d). Sass, 461 F.3d at 1129 . … The upshot of California’s parole scheme described below is that a release date normally must be set unless various factors exist, but the “unless” qualifier is substantial.

United States Ex Rel. Western Area Power Administration v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.

714 F. Supp. 1039 · District Court, N.D. California · Jun 8, 1989

The evidence establishes, however, that the energy sold to NCPA was non-firm surplus energy not associated with capacity. … Only the Basin agreement qualifies under this interpretation.

Chaparro Navarro v. Department of Homeland Security

District Court, N.D. California · Apr 1, 2020

The petitioner may also apply for U nonimmigrant status for certain qualifying 15 relatives. … The AAO also concluded that even if Chaparro 17 Navarro “had established that she was the victim of a qualifying crime or criminal activity 18 substantially similar to a qualifying crime, the record does not establish

Barker v. McFerran

District Court, N.D. California · May 6, 2024

The court instructed Plaintiff that an amended complaint “should clearly set forth each 11 of her claims and should also provide the date(s) she made contact with an EEO counselor about 12 each of her claims.” … “In a failure-to-promote case, a plaintiff may establish a prima 21 facie case of discrimination in violation of the ADEA by producing evidence that he or she was 22 (1) at least forty years old, (2) qualified for the

Jericho Nicolas v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Dec 7, 2020

question in this 1 waiting for requests qualifies as compensable under California and federal law. … Upon the filing of any amended 18 complaint, plaintiffs must also file as an attachment a redline clearly demarcating its 19 changes from the existing complaint. 20 IT IS SO

Mederer v. Access Capital Investment Fund Two, LP

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 4, 2022

Courts 3 have denied IFP status where plaintiffs have provided incomplete information about their financial 4 status or failed to clearly disclose their income and assets. … First, the plaintiff failed to establish that he is 23 entitled to proceed in forma pauperis. Second, the plaintiff has not satisfied his burden to establish 24 subject-matter jurisdiction.

Inostroz v. Eldridge

District Court, N.D. California · Jan 21, 2020

Abrahamson, 507 9 U.S. 619, 637 (1993)). 10 Section 2254(d)(1) restricts the source of clearly established Federal law to the Supreme 11 Court’s jurisprudence. … A state court decision is “contrary to” clearly established Supreme Court precedent if it 17 “applies a rule that contradicts the governing law set forth in [the Supreme Court’s] cases,” or if it 18 “confronts a set

Minority Television Project Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission

649 F. Supp. 2d 1025 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 19, 2009

When the FCC established noncommercial television half a century ago, it found that the “achievement of the objective for which special educational reservations have been established — i.e., the establishment of a genuinely … While Plaintiff disputes that this letter constituted a warning, it clearly put Lake-shore on notice.

Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co.

877 F. Supp. 2d 838 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 1, 2012

Accordingly, the Court finds that Pandit does not qualify as a prior art reference and therefore cannot anticipate the '647 Patent. c. … distinguish what is claimed from what went before in the art and clearly circumscribe what is foreclosed from future enterprise.”

Turner v. Woods

559 F. Supp. 603 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 15, 1982

Pursuant to the 1935 enactment of the Social Security Act, participating states established statewide “standards of assistance.” … First, the Court expressly qualified the statistics cited in the July 29 Opinion as representing only “roughly accurate estimated’ of the average mandatory payroll deductions and average work expenses of AFDC recipients in

Vasquez Cruz v. Barr

District Court, N.D. California · Nov 26, 2019

Categorical Approach 20 To determine whether a prior conviction qualifies as a crime involving moral turpitude, the 21 Court must “first make a categorical comparison of … . 254, 262 (2013). 24 The Ninth Circuit has held that California Penal Code section 273.5 “is a divisible statute for 25 which a conviction under one portion of the statute (corporal injury against a spouse) will qualify

Moses v. Corte Madera Tow

District Court, N.D. California · May 24, 2021

The British Corporation UNITED STATES 24 was Established in 1871. The British Corporation UNITED STATES was licensed in VIRGINIA. … In the amended complaint, he must identify each claim clearly and state the specific 4 || facts and actors that relate to each claim.

Threshold Enterprises Ltd. v. Pressed Juicery, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Apr 7, 2020

“Judgment on the pleadings is proper 23 when the moving party clearly establishes on the face of the pleadings that no material issue of 24 fact remains to be resolved and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter … Chesebrough-Pond’s 26 USA Co., 125 F.3d 28, 30 (2d Cir. 1997) (observing non-trademark use “evidenced by the fact that 27 the source of the defendants’ product [wa]s clearly identified by the prominent display of the

Synopsys, Inc. v. Ubiquiti Networks, Inc.

313 F. Supp. 3d 1056 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 13, 2018

Cal. 2012) (dismissing allegations of harm that "do not plausibly establish a significant reduction in service constituting an interference with the intended functioning of the system, which is necessary to establish a cause … Cal., Jan. 23, 2014) ("the cost of investigating the source of the breach and remedying it would qualify as 'loss' within that definition, as they would be required to return the system to its secured state").

Johnson v. San Francisco Health Care and Rehab Inc.

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

See Huffman, 2019 WL 2563133, at *5–6. 22 Defendant has not established that the SEIU CBA meets the criteria established in § 514 as 23 to all employees. … For example, Defendant contends that “[t]he CBA’s general scope, along with the 13 terms of its specific articles, clearly govern every statutory right alleged in the FAC.” (Dkt. No. 27 14 at 20.)

Williams v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, N.D. California · Oct 11, 2019

The third page 8 included the rules to “qualify for SSI payments based on disability.” … See, e.g., AR 126 (Notice of Reconsideration); AR 157 (Notice of Hearing). 27 The time period issue, however, is different, and it establishes on its own the need for a 1 your condition was not disabling before

Barnes & Noble, Inc. v. LSI Corp.

849 F. Supp. 2d 925 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 2, 2012

Indeed, a contrary holding would result in a perverse policy outcome — a culpable patentee would effectively immunize itself by selling the patent to an assignee free of any encumbrance which would otherwise attach — and … Rptr.3d 26 (2004) (“Even where no duty to disclose would otherwise exist, where one does speak he must speak the whole truth to the end that he does not conceal any facts which materially qualify those stated.”)

Solis v. Clean Harbors, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 31, 2022

Beyond conclusory 15 assertions, Solis makes no effort to establish that Aerotek’s purported breach was material. See 16 Sackett v. Spindler, 248 Cal. … Here, there is little doubt that Clean Harbors qualifies as a third-party beneficiary of the 15 Employment Agreement as a whole.