Case law

Grechko v. Calistoga Spa, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Apr 19, 2022

“While either Plaintiffs or 19 Defendants may qualify as prevailing parties, fee awards to Defendants should be reserved for 20 exceptional circumstances, lest they have a chilling effect on the filing of ADA lawsuits … July 24, 2018). 5 Unlike Advocates for Individuals with Disabilities, LLC, the Plaintiffs’ counsel did not 6 attempt to pursue a claim after it had become clearly moot.

Carlotti v. ASUS Computer International

District Court, N.D. California · Nov 19, 2019

The notice should clearly advise class members of the deadline, methods to opt out, 18 and the consequences of opting out.” … See Nafisi Decl. ¶ 19. 6 Accordingly, numerosity is established. 7 2.

Daniels v. Alphabet Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 8, 2023

In addition, the complaint cited public statements from Speaker Pelosi suggesting 4 that Congress could abrogate the immunity available to internet service providers under Section 5 230 of the Communications Decency … precedent or entirely meritless on their own terms. 21 For the reasons explained in the Court’s order granting defendants’ motion to dismiss Mr. 22 Daniels’s First Amendment claim, the Court finds that the claim clearly

Regents of the University of California v. LTI Flexible Products, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Oct 11, 2022

The SPA 12 explicitly named the patents-in-suit and clearly stated that the contract transferred their ownership 13 to Boyd. … The CDS clearly identified the patents-in-suit. Mot. Ex.

Becerra v. United States Department of the Interior

276 F. Supp. 3d 953 · District Court, N.D. California · Aug 30, 2017

Citizens for a Better Env't, 523 U.S. 83, 94-95 , 118 S.Ct. 1003 , 140 L.Ed.2d 210 (1998) (“The requirement that jurisdiction be established as a threshold matter ‘spring[s] from the nature and limits of the judicial power … In addition, while the “effective date” is clearly set forth in the formal announcement, of the final Rule, the same is not true of dates that ONRR subsequently labels “compliance dates” after the Rule takes effect and then

Flores-Mendez v. Zoosk, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Oct 5, 2021

This order agrees. 1 To qualify for relief, plaintiffs must show “a loss of money or property caused by unfair 2 competition.” Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17204. … Any such motion must 3 5 include as an exhibit a redlined version of the proposed amendment that clearly identifies all 6 changes from the current complaint.

Scott Crawford v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 26, 2021

Without more from Defendants 24 explaining why Plaintiffs’ arguments cannot be applied to both entities, or how Rasier’s business differs from Uber’s, there is no basis to conclude Rasier is categorically immune from … Though the exact contours of this proposal will likely benefit from 23 additional explanation and development at trial, it clearly communicates a desire to use Uber to 24 request and obtain a ride in an accessible vehicle

Ortiz v. Amazon.com LLC

District Court, N.D. California · Apr 27, 2020

Rather, the parties shall submit 26 one chambers copy, which contains an unredacted version of the document with the portions to be sealed clearly highlighted. … Defendants argue that Ortiz cannot show each element of the 7 executive exemption can be established by common proof.

Chang v. Cashman

District Court, N.D. California · Nov 15, 2024

“The ABC test places the burden on the hiring entity to establish 15 that a worker is an independent contractor, and the hiring entity’s failure to establish any one of 16 the ABC factors will be sufficient in itself … to establish that the worker is an employee . . . .”

Namisnak v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 26, 2021

Without more from Defendants 24 explaining why Plaintiffs’ arguments cannot be applied to both entities, or how Rasier’s business differs from Uber’s, there is no basis to conclude Rasier is categorically immune from … Though the exact contours of this proposal will likely benefit from 23 additional explanation and development at trial, it clearly communicates a desire to use Uber to 24 request and obtain a ride in an accessible vehicle

Belyea v. GreenSky, Inc.

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

“Judgment 18 on the pleadings is proper when the moving party clearly establishes on the face of the pleadings 19 that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter … Such 27 brokerage services might well qualify as “services” under the CLRA.

Kendall

District Court, N.D. California · Jun 16, 2026

Strike 23–29; Def.’s Reply, Dkt. 80, 3–7.) 23 Defendants then argue that, since they have established the validity of the search warrants, 24 it follows that all the referenced claims fail because they are entirely … Wash. 2013) (“An officer would not be entitled to qualified immunity with 17 regard to an overbroad search warrant if the overbroad warrant was issued as a result of judicial 18 deception.”), aff’d sub nom.

In Re Evander Frank Kane

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 9, 2024

Judge Johnson 13 did not clearly err in his interpretation of the facts before him. 14 A. … Under California law, the party claiming the automatic homestead exemption has the 25 burden of proof to establish that he is entitled to an exemption.

Behrend v. San Francisco Zen Center, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 14, 2023

Behrend resided at SF Center to practice and train in Soto 1 faith does not establish religious training or leadership. … Behrend’s practice of the faith qualified him as a leader.

Turner v. Neuschmid

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 21, 2022

“[A] federal habeas court may not issue the writ simply because that court concludes 16 in its independent judgment that the relevant state court decision applied clearly 17 established federal law erroneously or incorrectly … A federal habeas court making the “unreasonable application” 19 inquiry should ask whether the state court’s application of clearly established federal law 20 was “objectively unreasonable.”

Zarco v. VWR International, LLC

District Court, N.D. California · May 13, 2021

Defendants contend that Plaintiff cannot establish a triable issue 3 of fact as to any of his claims. … Plaintiff clearly brought a CFRA 22 “discrimination and retaliation” claim, citing to the section of the statute that makes it unlawful to

High Sierra Hikers Ass'n v. United States Department of the Interior

848 F. Supp. 2d 1036 · District Court, N.D. California · Jan 24, 2012

Additionally, the SUMMP established specific protections for park meadows and delineated permissible grazing areas. … The EIS clearly explains this tiered strategy to the public throughout the document and more specifically in the section discussing mitigation measures.

Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. v. TWi Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

87 F. Supp. 3d 1263 · District Court, N.D. California · Apr 10, 2015

See Philips, 505 F.3d at. 1379 (“Notably, the Supreme Court in Warner-Jenkinson did not even mention the qualifier [‘approximately’] in allowing consideration of the doctrine of equivalents.”). … More recently, the predecessor to the Federal Circuit explained that “the specifying in 102(e) of an application filed ‘in the United States’ clearly demonstrates a policy in our patent statutes to the effect that knowledge

Rodriguez v. Koenig

District Court, N.D. California · Dec 31, 2020

In the alternative, Defendant moves for summary judgment on the ground that the 20 undisputed evidence indicates that Defendant did not violate Plaintiff’s due process rights, and 21 that Defendant is entitled to qualified … immunity.

Poorsina v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 10, 2021

He also appears to allege that Wells Fargo approved 5 Zhang and Li for “government-sponsored Fannie Mae loans” even though they did not qualify 6 under federal regulations. … As noted, the complaint does not clearly allege an injury to 8 Poorsina. It also fails to allege how Wells Fargo’s conduct caused any injury suffered by 9 Poorsina.