Case law

I.B. ex rel. Fife v. Facebook, Inc.

905 F. Supp. 2d 989 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 25, 2012

Section 6710 clearly provides that “a contract of a minor may be disaffirmed by the minor before majority or within a reasonable time afterwards,” reflecting the principle that the power of avoidance is personal to the minor … American Express Publishing, Inc., 147 Cal.App.4th 224 , 54 Cal.Rptr.3d 91 (2007), in süpport of its argument that California courts have consistently held that intangible interests do not qualify as “goods” under the CLRA

Sudhof

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 20, 2026

2 According to the complaint, Cell Biotech is a Chinese corporation “dedicated to the 3 research, development, application, and promotion of stem cell technology and immune … Motions to strike are 15 generally disfavored and “should not be granted unless the matter to be stricken clearly could have 16 no possible bearing on the subject of the litigation.” Platte Anchor Bolt, Inc. v.

Ramirez v. Anvil Builders, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 23, 2024

As discussed 22 above in the context of LMRA preemption, the Court has found that Defendant has submitted 23 adequate evidence to establish that the CBA satisfies the requirements of Section 514 and 24 therefore … Both 15 exemptions clearly apply here. There is no dispute that Plaintiff was “employed in a construction 16 occupation” as Defendant’s employee.

Hurricane Electric, LLC v. National Fire Insurance Company of Hartford

District Court, N.D. California · Nov 17, 2020

Judgment on the Pleadings 18 A motion for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of 19 Civil Procedure is proper “when the moving party clearly establishes … “A dismissal on the 26 pleadings for failure to state a claim is proper only if ‘the movant clearly establishes that 27 no material issue of fact remains to be resolved[.]’” McGlinchy v. Shell Chem.

Salcedo Aceros v. Kaiser

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 12, 2025

for § 1225(b)(2), a noncitizen must (1) be an applicant for admission, (2) be “seeking 22 admission”, and (3) be “not clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to be admitted.” … Once a liberty interest is established, the question is whether process – a hearing – would 22 lessen the risk of an erroneous detention.

Siqueiros v. General Motors LLC

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

Cal. 2019) (“[A]llegations of overpayment based on 4 a defendant’s failure to disclose a product’s limitations are clearly sufficient to satisfy Article III’s 5 injury-in-fact requirement.” … To qualify as “merchantable,” goods must meet various requirements. Id. § 25 25-2-314(2)(a)-(f).

Pop Top Corp v. Rakuten Kobo Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Jan 28, 2022

A party must establish its entitlement to attorneys’ fees under section 285 by a 10 preponderance of the evidence. … “[N]ot every case that qualifies as exceptional under § 285 21 will also qualify for sanctions under the court’s inherent power.” MarcTec, LLC v. Johnson & 22 Johnson, 664 F.3d 907, 921 (Fed.

Waddell v. Minton

District Court, N.D. California · Jun 16, 2020

The court must identify any cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims which are 25 frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seek monetary relief 26 from a defendant who is immune … Gunnell, 685 F.2d 150 (5th Cir. 1985) (no claim stated where prisoner 3 forced to spend two days in hot dirty cell with no water). 4 In prison-conditions cases, the necessary state of mind to establish

Unite Here Retirement Fund v. City Of San Jose

District Court, N.D. California · Jan 28, 2021

The Fund is a multiemployer trust 7 fund that established and maintains a plan known as the “Legacy Plan” to provide retirement 8 income to employees for whom contributions are made by employers. … At the same time, Dolce 5 13 “contends that it was not, and never was, an ‘employer’ of the bargaining unit employees who 14 || worked at the Hayes Mansion,” a position that would clearly dictate judicial review

Garcha

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 17, 2026

Indeed, DHS has discretion to place noncitizens in 20 regular removal, even when they qualify for expedited removal. … As are agency actions that are “contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or 25 immunity.” 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(B).

La Canada Ventures, Inc. v. MDalgorithms, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 2, 2024

Rather, Defendant’s website 3 states clearly that its products consist of “clinically proven and FDA cleared topical anti-acne 4 ingredients.” … Moreover, by Kostick’s own 3 account, each of these sources consist of generic discussions of digital marketing and are not 4 || clearly connected to his analysis.

In re Telephone Information Needed for a Criminal Investigation

119 F. Supp. 3d 1011 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 29, 2015

Cell phones plainly qualify as “effects” under the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. See Oliver v. … The record does not establish how long “as long as reasonably necessary” is.

Reliance Insurance v. McGrath

671 F. Supp. 669 · District Court, N.D. California · Feb 23, 1987

Reliance sent defendant a cablegram on September 13th informing defendant that only on inspection of the vessel by a qualified surveyor could Reliance be assured that defendant had taken the necessary steps to arrest aggravation … According to the testimony of Joe Copeland, plaintiff’s expert in marine insurance claims and underwriting, which I accept, this has long been the established interpretation of the Sue and Labor Clause in the industry, and

Soulis v. Saul

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 17, 2021

Barnhart, 433 F.3d 683, 687 (9th Cir. 2005). 8 Thus, a finding of non-severity at Step Two must be “clearly established by medical evidence” 9 (see id.), and if a claimant meets her evidentiary burden under Step Two … It cannot, therefore, be reasonably contended that 1 subject to Step Two screening and labeled as non-severe, because both conditions have been 2 clearly established by medical evidence.

Golden v. Microsoft Corporation

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 29, 2024

Golden, “Microsoft never clearly communicated the findings of this 11 investigation or the precise reasons for [his] termination” to him. Id. ¶ 31. 12 On these allegations, Mr. … of the plaintiff to establish a cause of action against the non- 21 diverse party in state court.”

United States v. Saydam

District Court, N.D. California · Jul 12, 2024

When defining recklessness, the Third and Fourth Circuits have held that a 22 defendant is reckless in the FBAR context if he “(1) clearly ought to have known that (2) there 23 was a grave risk that an accurate FBAR … None of the employees are qualified to prepare returns related to foreign income. 9 Id.

Cape v. San Jose Police Department

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 1, 2025

Cape’s § 1983 Claims and the Heck Doctrine 5 Section 1983 “provides a cause of action for ‘the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or 6 immunities secured by the Constitution and laws’ of the United … Cape’s complaint alleges that officers violated his Fifth Amendment rights by 11 continuing to question him during the traffic stop, even though he “clearly stated that [he] did not 12 want to answer any questions without

Regional Medical Center of San Jose v. WH Administrators, Inc

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 30, 2021

And even where facts are accepted as true, “a plaintiff may plead herself out of court” if 14 she “plead[s] facts which establish that [s]he cannot prevail on [her] . . . claim.” Weisbuch v. … Although the MOOP provision 15 establishes an “Out-of-Pocket Maximum” of $6,350 for a “Covered Person,” the SPD also clearly 16 informs a “Covered Person” on the very same page where the MOOP provision appears that

Cervantes v. Elsen

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

States clearly and simply each claim he seeks to bring in federal court as 23 required under Rule 8, and he should: … Names supervisorial liability defendants who committed an affirmative 13 act, and is not linked solely in his or her supervisory capacity, or against whom plaintiff can allege 14 facts that would establish either supervisorial

O'Bannon v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n

7 F. Supp. 3d 955 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 8, 2014

She reasoned, “While the MLBP agreement does not specify a price to be charged, the effect of the agreement clearly eliminates price competition between the [teams] for trademark licenses. … services just as they are to establish a restraint of trade in the college education market.