Case law

Church & Dwight Co., Inc. v. Mayer Laboratories, Inc.

868 F. Supp. 2d 876 · District Court, N.D. California · Apr 12, 2012

See Concord Boat, 207 F.3d at 1056 (rejecting tax theory in the context of a market-share discount because some buyers purchased more than necessary to qualify for the discount). … Any one of these rates, though high, is not clearly outside of the permissible range. See, e.g., B & H Med., L.L.C. v.

BillFloat Inc. v. Collins Cash Inc.

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

Some Sleekcraft factors favor Billfloat, 1 • The two word marks at issue – SmartBiz and Smart Business Funding – clearly 2 have some similarity. … Legal Standard 1 A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an

True Health Chiropractic Inc v. McKesson Corporation

District Court, N.D. California · Dec 24, 2020

Defendants were ordered to identify “each type of act 3 that Defendants believe demonstrates a recipient’s express permission to receive faxes (e.g. 4 completing a software registration), (2) explain[] how that act qualifies … And because Amerifactors establishes that those who received faxes via 10 an online fax service have different legal rights than those who received faxes on a telephone 11 facsimile machine, it clearly “determines rights

Taylor v. Shutterfly, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 19, 2020

Offer is good for $40 off one qualifying merchandise order 7 of $40 or more (after any other discounts and before taxes, shipping and handling) through 8 shutterfly.com or our mobile-friendly site … Berry’s declaration establishes that the 24 Berry Exhibits are true and correct copies of the promotions and disclosures as they appeared to 25 class members in 2015 and 2016. Opp’n at 5.

Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Chung

District Court, N.D. California · May 26, 2020

Absent such explanations, Williams’ cannot establish the “clear case of 14 hardship or inequity” necessary for this court to enter a stay. … Upon the filing of any amended 3 complaint, plaintiff must also file a redline version clearly demarcating its changes from 4 the FAC. 5 IT IS SO

Pearson v. State of California

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 8, 2022

The vague statement that Pearson “was assaulted by 8 his cellmate” does not establish a serious medical need. … And although Plaintiffs clearly plead that Pearson had serious 12 medical needs by the time he became unresponsive at 4:35 p.m., see SAC ¶ 32, they fail to 13 plead that any official delayed the response or otherwise

Benjamin Wise v. Monterey County Hospitality Association Health and Welfare Plan

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 12, 2020

“The district court should exercise its 11 discretion, however, only when circumstances clearly establish that additional evidence is 12 necessary to conduct an adequate de novo review of the benefit decision.” … Accordingly, as with Plaintiff, Defendant MAXIMUS fails to show that 5 “circumstances clearly establish that additional evidence is necessary to conduct an adequate de 6 novo review of the benefit decision.”

IntegrityMessageBoards.com v. Facebook, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Nov 6, 2020

However, defendant fails to identify any authority establishing 21 that such deterrence eliminates an actionable risk of future harm. … These findings do not 18 concern plaintiff’s campaign in particular and their specificity suggest that they might 19 qualify as trade secrets.

In re Cloudera, Inc. Securities Litigation

District Court, N.D. California · May 25, 2021

To qualify as an untrue statement of material 3 fact, a statement must be both false and material to investors. See In re Rigel Pharm., 697 F.3d at 4 880 n.8. … To qualify as an omission, it is not enough that the registration statement omitted material 5 facts. See id. (citing Matrixx Initiatives v.

Beijing Meishe Network Technology Co., Ltd. v. TikTok Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 2, 2025

“To qualify as an expert, a witness must have ‘knowledge, skill, experience, training, or 24 education’ relevant to such evidence or fact in issue.” U.S. v. … If defendants can 12 establish that Mr. Pooley’s consulting work includes relevant experience with software companies, 13 Mr.

Dixon v. Berryhill

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 30, 2019

Accordingly, the ALJ ruled that Plaintiff was not disabled and therefore did 19 not qualify for SSI. … Ninth Circuit case law provides that “[i]f an adjudicator is unable to determine clearly the 15 effect of an impairment or combination of impairments on the individual’s ability to do basic work 16 activities, the sequential

Protege Restaurant Partners LLC v. Sentinel Insurance Company, Limited

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 8, 2021

The 5 Court finds that the Virus Exclusion is unambiguous as a matter of law and clearly applies to 6 … Plaintiff has not alleged any facts in its First Amended 11 Complaint that indicate that COVID-19 qualifies as a “specified cause of loss.” See generally, 12 FAC.

Iravanian

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 6, 2026

Iravanian, however, has 2 again failed to allege (1) that other class members worked qualifying shifts and (2) that they did 3 not take breaks because they were unaware they had the right or were prevented by their … QG 1 need not establish that she timely suffered those violations. 2 The cases Defendant cites do not support requiring Iravanian to establish that she timely 3 suffered each predicate violation.

Hilario v. Allstate Insurance Company

District Court, N.D. California · Nov 22, 2022

the evidence in fact establishes 24 that plaintiffs would win at trial. … Class counsel are competent and 9 qualified, and have no conflicts of interest with any class members. 10 The adequacy requirements of Rule 23(a)(4) are met. 11 III.

Chen v. Chase Bank USA, N.A.

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

Thus, it appears 14 that Plaintiff’s counsel is “qualified, experienced, and generally able to conduct the class action 15 litigation.” See Bellinghausen, 303 F.R.D. at 617. 16 B. … Such notice must clearly 10 state the following: 11 (i) the nature of the action; (ii) the definition of the class certified; (iii) the class

Parker v. Cherne Contracting Corporation

District Court, N.D. California · Dec 9, 2021

total Qualified Paper Paychecks for all Settlement Class Members, resulting in the Payment 9 Ratio for each Settlement Class Member. … “Generally, unless the settlement is clearly 3 inadequate, its acceptance and approval are preferable to lengthy and expensive litigation with 4 uncertain results.” Ching v.

City & Cnty. of S.F. v. Sessions

349 F. Supp. 3d 924 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 5, 2018

But at no point in this guidance does the OJP clearly answer the questions raised by San Francisco about what its interpretation of compliance really means. See DOJ RJN, Ex. … (citing 34 U.S.C. § 10156 (f) ("If the Attorney General determines ... that a State will be unable to qualify or receive funds ... then such State's allocation (or portion thereof) shall be awarded by the Attorney General

In re Google Referrer Header Privacy Litigation

District Court, N.D. California · Jun 5, 2020

pleading stage, “must clearly allege facts demonstrating each 18 element.” … Id. ¶ 36. 20 Now, Defendant disputes that the search terms qualify as “personal information” and that 21 their actions amount to a breach.

MacClelland v. Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless

District Court, N.D. California · Jul 1, 2022

June 25, 2021) (holding that incorporation of the AAA rules does not 7 clearly and unmistakably establish an agreement to delegate questions of arbitrability where one 8 party was unsophisticated); Ingalls v. … Therefore, if Plaintiffs’ 25 requested relief qualifies as public injunctive relief, Verizon may not negate that claim.

Sonos, Inc. v. Google LLC

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 16, 2022

Infringers should not be allowed to immunize themselves from ongoing 2 willfulness by forcing patent owners into litigation. … Any such motion must include as an 7 exhibit a redlined version of the proposed amendment that clearly identifies all changes from 8 the amended complaint.