Case law

Thornton v. Daly City

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 15, 2021

criminal matter, see id. at 13 ¶¶ 108-09, 124-29, requests for informal discovery from the District Attorney’s Office, see id. at 14 ¶¶ 110-13, 118, 134-36, and the issuance of subpoenas for witnesses to “further establish … Even affording 19 Plaintiff some leeway given his pro se status, the Court finds that most of the federal claims in the 20 FAC clearly fail.

Rheinheimer

District Court, N.D. California · Jul 7, 2026

First, an insured can establish potential liability by showing that the “underlying claim 15 may fall within policy coverage.” Montrose Chem. … Insurers similarly bear the burden of “establishing that a specific [policy] exclusion” 22 applies. Minkler, 49 Cal. 4th at 322.

Situ v. Leavitt

240 F.R.D. 551 · District Court, N.D. California · Jan 12, 2007

Based on all of the above, the Court concludes that Plaintiffs have met their burden of establishing numerosity. 2. … Clearly, this action aims to define the relationship of the defendants to the universe of children with whose care the defendants are charged.

Adeeb

District Court, N.D. California · Jan 2, 2026

Defendants move to dismiss for failure to state a claim, 16 citing various immunities, exhaustion requirements, or substantive law. … Adeeb asserts that his pleadings and declarations establish his “repeated, timely 18 efforts to appeal and resolves these issues administratively.”

Yurok Tribe v. United States Bureau of Reclamation

231 F. Supp. 3d 450 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 8, 2017

Given these unexpected conditions, the Bureau sought “to begin comprehensive discussions to clearly establish a path forward to resolve the outstanding issues.” Id. … Plaintiffs contend that this precedent clearly establishes that an injunction is an appropriate form of relief on a reiniti-ation claim.

Hoopa Valley Tribe v. National Marine Fisheries Service

230 F. Supp. 3d 1106 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 8, 2017

Given these unexpected conditions, the Bureau sought “to begin comprehensive discussions to clearly establish a path forward to resolve the outstanding issues.” Id. … Plaintiffs contend that this precedent clearly establishes that an injunction is an appropriate form of relief on a reinitiation claim.

Barnes v. AT & T Pension Benefit Plan-Nonbargained Program

963 F. Supp. 2d 950 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 26, 2013

Barnes has adequately established some success on the merits. 2. … Plaintiff finally had to establish that her suit was a “substantial” or “significant” cause of defendant’s action providing relief.

Flintkote Co. v. Aviva PLC

177 F. Supp. 3d 1165 · District Court, N.D. California · Apr 4, 2016

Claimants who qualify for payment under the TDPs are to be paid a percentage of the nominal “value” The Trust assigns to their claims. Id. at §§ 2.3, 4.L, 4.2, 5.1(c). … And, according to the court, the CDPs established that the only amount that Fuller-Austin was obligated to pay was each claim’s payment percentage — not the allowed liquidated value.

Robbins v. United States

5 F.2d 690 · District Court, N.D. California · Apr 29, 1925

Daugherty said: “In fact, I am of the opinion that no established rule can be gathered 'from the decided cases in that state.” … (b) If the decisions in California, taken all together, have not clearly determined the question, this court is not bound.

Simmons v. Mischel

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 3, 2020

The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing 13 subject matter jurisdiction. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994). 14 A jurisdictional challenge may be facial or factual. … The Supreme Court has determined that jurisdictional dismissals are warranted “where the 6 alleged claim under the Constitution or federal statues clearly appears to be immaterial and made 7 solely for the purpose of

O'Neil v. City and County of San Francisco

District Court, N.D. California · May 3, 2021

Designations that are shown to be clearly unjustified or that have been 10 made for an improper purpose (e.g., to unnecessarily encumber or retard the case development process or to impose … follows: 16 If a party takes steps to release documents subject to a stipulated order, the party opposing disclosure has the burden of establishing

Muhammad

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 23, 2026

Factual Summary of Claims from Complaint 11 Muhammad claims that he is an individual with qualifying disabilities because of a 12 claimed “failed left knee medial meniscus tear repair and left … “In response, a claimant 16 shall receive a written decision” from the Institutional Office of Grievances “clearly explaining the 17 reasoning for the Reviewing Authority’s decision as to each claim.”

Pai v. Tesla Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Jan 28, 2025

should decide for itself whether § 1’s ‘contracts of employment’ exclusion 7 applies before ordering arbitration,” irrespective of a delegation clause). 8 Plaintiffs’ employment agreements with Tesla do not qualify … No. 37 at 4-9. 17 How any of this might be relevant here was never clearly stated by either side.

In Re Seagate Technology II Securities Litigation

843 F. Supp. 1341 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 2, 1994

Without the assistance of qualified econometricians, however, this court has great reservations about seeking comfort in such a sweeping generalization. … Turning first to the interests of in/ out traders, a plaintiff class composed primarily of retention traders will clearly result in prejudice to the in/out plaintiffs’ interests.

Logan v. Meta Platforms, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Oct 25, 2022

The Court concludes that Meta’s copyright tag does not qualify as CMI 26 “conveyed in connection with” Logan’s photos. … The FAC clearly 2 specifies the CMI removed—Logan’s “name, the title of the Photograph, and a link to a 3 Creative Commons website . . . setting forth the terms and conditions for use”—and the 4 photos from which

Houston v. Gutierrez

District Court, N.D. California · Dec 15, 2023

Whether the alleged wrongdoing is 14 objectively harmful enough to establish a constitutional violation is contextual and responsive to 15 contemporary standards of decency. Id. at 8. … Defendants’ qualified immunity argument 7 fails because no reasonable officer could believe that pepper-spraying, choking, dragging, 8 punching, kicking, and kneeing a prisoner, and restraining such prisoner while this

King v. Contra Costa County

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 28, 2020

Although the County’s reply 17 clearly alerted Plaintiff to the fact that his opposition was overdue, Plaintiff has not filed 18 any opposition or other paper with the Court. 19 The failure … : (1) the 8 deprivation of any rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution or federal 9 law, (2) by a person acting under the color of state law.

Moody v. Liberty Life Assur. Co. of Boston

595 F. Supp. 2d 1090 · District Court, N.D. California · Jan 26, 2009

The letter does not describe what sort of data would qualify as objective supporting evidence. 30. The letter states that Moody’s occupation is “typically performed within the light physical demand level.” AR-0249. 31. … Analysis of cognitive impairment was clearly an afterthought in Liberty’s review.

Arnold v. United Artists Theatre Circuit, Inc.

94 Daily Journal DAR 16670 · District Court, N.D. California · Apr 26, 1994

In addition, plaintiffs’ attorneys are well qualified to serve as class counsel, having substantial experience litigating both class-action cases and disability ae-cess suits. … Such challenged features clearly affect all classmembers in roughly the same way.

Johnson v. County of Santa Clara

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 21, 2023

Lubrin argues that (1) there is no evidence that 14 he violated any of Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment rights and (2), even if he did, he is entitled to 15 qualified immunity because there was no clearly established … At the very least, Lubrin would also be “entitled to qualified immunity as 14 Gaut was [and is] the law of the Ninth Circuit at the time of the alleged threats and harassment.” 15 Hayes v.