Case law

IN RE PLUM BABY FOOD LITIGATION

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 28, 2024

(Crawford Dep. at 316:19.) 10 Plaintiffs David, Gulkarov, and Brown would only consider buying the product for hypothetical 11 grandchildren. … See Grausz v.

Shannon v. United States Civil Service Commission

444 F. Supp. 354 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 22, 1977

Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 332 [ 96 S.Ct. 893 , 47 L.Ed.2d 18 ] (1976). Cf. Arnett v. Kennedy, 416 U.S. 134, 166 [ 94 S.Ct. 1633 , 40 L.Ed.2d 15 ] (1974); Board of Regents v. … State Board of Elections, supra [ 393 U.S. 544 ], at 572 [ 89 S.Ct. 817 , 22 L.Ed.2d 1 ].

Leslie Salt Co. v. Froehlke

403 F. Supp. 1292 · District Court, N.D. California · Dec 9, 1974

On these issues defendants principally rely upon Webster v. Askew, 371 F.Supp. 733 (N.D.Fla.1973); Rincon v. Band of Mission Indians v. County of San Diego, et al., 495 F.2d 1 (9th Cir. 1974); United States v. Joseph G. … MacMullen, 406 U.S. 498 , 92 S.Ct. 1749 , 32 L.Ed.2d 257 (1972); and Marsh v. County School Board or Roanoke County, Va., 305 F.2d 94 (4th Cir. 1962).

GTE Mobilnet of California Limited Partnership v. City of Berkeley

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

Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 554, 555 (2007) (citing 27 Papasan v. Allain, 478 U.S. 265, 286 (1986)); see Lee v. … In T Mobile, the plaintiff, a wireless telecommunications service provider, applied 20 to a zoning board for permission to erect an antenna in Wilmington, Delaware. 913 F.3d at 316. 21 The zoning board orally denied

United States v. Oracle Corp.

331 F. Supp. 2d 1098 · District Court, N.D. California · Sep 9, 2004

Shoe Co. v. … Brooke Group Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 509 U.S. 209, 238 , 113 S.Ct. 2578 , 125 L.Ed.2d 168 (1993); Elders Grain, 868 F.2d at 905 .

Ghafi Ibrahim v. Department of Homeland Security

District Court, N.D. California · May 27, 2025

This includes parole decisions, 24 which are discretionary. 8 U.S.C. § 1182(d)(5)(A); see also Vasquez Romero v. … See Patel v. Reno, 134 F.3d 929, 931 (9th Cir. 1997) (requiring a 10 nondiscretionary duty for mandamus relief to be proper); R.T. Vanderbilt Co. v.

Malekar v. Birley

District Court, N.D. California · May 1, 2023

Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. 4 Brown, 564 U.S. 915, 919 (2011). 5 B. … See Brown v. 140 NM LLC, No. 17-CV- 12 05782-JSW, 2019 WL 118425, at *6 (N.D. Cal.

Carver v. United States

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

See Ward v. … See Brown v. Rison, 895 F.2d 533, 535 (9th 15 Cir. 1990), overruled on other grounds, Reno v. Koray, 515 U.S. 50, 54–55 (1995).

Palantir Technologies Inc. v. Abramowitz

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

Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 268 F.R.D. 344, 348 (N.D. 26 Cal. 2010). … The Court also does not read United States ex rel. 7 Brown v. Celgene Corp., No. CV 10-3165-GHK (SSX), 2014 WL 12588296 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 21, 8 2014) as broadly as Defendants.

Ecological Rights Foundation v. F.E.M.A.

365 F. Supp. 3d 993 · District Court, N.D. California · Jun 14, 2018

Desert Ass'n v. … Hensley v.

Howington

District Court, N.D. California · Jan 29, 2026

See, e.g., Affinity Credit Union v. Apple 12 Inc., No. 22-cv-04174-JSW, 2024 WL 3859802, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 16, 2024); Alta Devices, 13 Inc. v. … Feb. 14 20, 2019); see also Apple Inc. v.

In re California Nav. & Imp. Co.

110 F. 670 · District Court, N.D. California · Sep 3, 1901

Caldwell v. Steamboat Co., 47 N. Y. 282 ; Dunlap v. The Reliance (C. C.) 2 Fed. 249 ; Boyce v. Stage Co., 25 Cal. 460 ; Yoemans v. Navigation Co.,. 44 Cal. 71 . … He was a laborer, industrious, in good health, and was employed at the usual rate of wages paid for unskilled labor, and at the time of his death was receiving *676 $i per day and board.

Bodri v. GoPro, Inc.

252 F. Supp. 3d 912 · District Court, N.D. California · May 1, 2017

(“GoPro,” or “the Company”), its Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”), Nicholas Woodman, its former Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”), Jack Lazar, and the President and Director of its Board, Anthony Bates (collectively, “Defendants … Reese v. Malone, 747 F.3d 557, 568 (9th Cir. 2014) (quoting Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v.

Pantoja v. City of Gonzales

538 F. Supp. 335 · District Court, N.D. California · May 6, 1982

In the first case, Rutledge v. … Arizona Board of Regents, 660 F.2d 1345 (9th Cir. 1981), a former Arizona State University football player sued his coach and other state employees under Section 1983 over the loss of his team position and scholarship and

Flannery

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

Brown v. Ambow Educ. Holding Ltd., No. 12-cv-5062 PSG AJWX, 2014 WL 2 523166, at *9 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 6, 2014). … GMBH v.

Cooper v. United Air Lines, Inc.

82 F. Supp. 3d 1084 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 10, 2015

Employee 2, as Plaintiff, received merit based raises during his tenure as security supervisor as well as the across-the-board increase in 2005 following United’s restructuring and the across-the-board decreases following … In Taylor v.

County of Santa Clara v. Trump

275 F. Supp. 3d 1196 · District Court, N.D. California · Nov 20, 2017

Mathews v. … See Califano v.

Cortez v. United States of America

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 21, 2024

Proc. § 377.60(b)(1), namely, that they 14 were "actually dependent, to some extent, upon the decedent for the necessaries of life," 15 see Chavez v. Carpenter, 91 Cal. … Code § 377.11, one example being that they are 4 || beneficiaries "under the terms of [a] trust instrument" so providing, see Brown v. Gordon, 5 |} 2022 WL 2391002, at 3 (N.D. Cal.

Moonbug Entertainment Limited v. Babybus (Fujian) Network Technology Co., Ltd

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

Mattel, 616 F.3d at 913– 18 14 (citing Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 35 F.3d 1435, 1439, 1446–47 (9th Cir. 1994)); 19 see also Landsberg v. … and facial structure.”); see also JCW Invs. v.

Abrams v. Allied World Assurance Company (U.S.) Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 24, 2023

of Directors (the 7 ‘Board’). … MacKinnon v. Truck Ins. Exch., 31 Cal. 4th 635, 647 (2003) (quoting 13 Waller v. Truck Ins. Exch., Inc. 11 Cal. 4th 1, 18 (1995)).