Case law

Adkins v. Adkins

District Court, N.D. California · Oct 7, 2019

A.F.A.’s daycare qualified, as its base language was German, though 23 children and teachers spoke multiple languages. See Dkt. … First, “[w]hen a child has no clearly established habitual residence 25 elsewhere, it may become habitually resident even in a place where it was intended to live only for 26 a limited time.”

FullView, Inc. v. Polycom, Inc.

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

Polycom’s filings during the IPR Proceedings 27 clearly shows that Polycom is aware that the new aspect of the ‘143 Patent was the addition of a 28 || “support member”: 1 Nalwa is an earlier … L.R. 3-6. 17 The moving party bears the burden of establishing diligence.

Yockey v. Salesforce, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 16, 2024

In the first set of 15 cases, the messages were clearly in digital storage and therefore were not simultaneously or 16 contemporaneously intercepted. See Konop v. … The Court agrees with those Ninth Circuit district court decisions that have 23 found that software qualifies as a device under Section 632.

Elgindy v. AGA Service Company

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 29, 2021

Ct., 51 Cal. 4th 310, 322 (2011) (a plaintiff must 24 “establish a loss or deprivation of money or property sufficient to qualify as injury-in-fact” under 25 the UCL and FAL); Meyer v. … Reno, 98 F.3d 12 1121, 1130 (9th Cir. 1996) (“Economic injury is clearly a sufficient basis for standing.”).

Contour IP Holding, LLC v. GoPro, Inc.

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

Hu MTE 6-7. 5 Contour counters that Hu’s report “clearly shows that the Contour products practice at least the 6 independent claims of the invention” and lays out the paragraphs in the report where Hu addresses 7 … July 5, 2015) (excluding opinions of an expert who was “more than 7 qualified technically” but lacked “experience in consumer demand related to [the] non-infringing 8 alternatives”).

Global Industrial Investment Limited v. 1955 Capital Fund I GP LLC

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 27, 2023

Petitioners 3 clearly filed the motion for preliminary injunction “in connection” with these proceedings. … In short, the 10 Court finds that Petitioners have not established that Respondents disobeyed a “specific and 11 definite court order.” Reno Air Racing Ass’n., Inc. v.

Anokye v. Kijakazi

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 30, 2023

Two 8 breakthrough seizures in September 2019 and provoked (febrile) seizures in November 2019 did 9 not establish a marked limitation during the relevant time period. … Cal. 2008) (“[A]s a lay person, an ALJ is simply not qualified to interpret raw medical 8 data in functional terms.”)

Anisetty v. Kijakazi

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

An impairment that manifests only some of those criteria, no matter how 16 severely, does not qualify.” Sullivan v. Zebley, 493 U.S. 521, 530 (1990) (footnote omitted). … Id. 24 (citing Treichler, 775 F.3d at 1101). 25 It is only “rare circumstances that result in a direct award of benefits” and “only when the 26 record clearly contradicted an

Reilly v. Apple Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Jan 7, 2022

Opp. at 4-5 (citing Brown Shoe 1 discuss in detail have established” that “[t]he principle most fundamental to product market 2 definition is ‘cross-elasticity of demand.’” Kaplan v. … representations and then arbitrarily removing it from the Apple Store 16 based on information that was available to Apple since the beginning of the relationship but does not qualify

Zeman v. Twitter, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Apr 18, 2024

Tel. & Tel., 752 F.2d 1356, 1362 (9th Cir. 1985) (“Statistical evidence is 10 unquestionably relevant in a . . . disparate treatment case . . . because it can be used to establish a 11 general discriminatory pattern … Standing 19 “[A]t the pleading stage, the plaintiff[s] must ‘clearly . . . allege facts demonstrating’” that 20 they “(1) suffered an injury in fact, (2) that

Oracle America, Inc. v. Procore Technologies, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California · Apr 9, 2025

Cal. 2012). 4 “Plaintiffs must clearly refer to tangible trade secret material instead of referring to a system 5 which potentially qualifies for trade secret protection. … Procore argues on reply that Oracle does not plead 11 facts sufficient to establish that Mariano’s misappropriation occurred “within the scope.” ECF 12 No. 55 at 21.

Stevens v. O'Malley

District Court, N.D. California · Dec 20, 2024

An impairment that manifests only some of those criteria, no matter how 2 severely, does not qualify.” Sullivan v. Zebley, 493 U.S. 521, 530 (1990) (footnote omitted). … Along the same lines, “an individual’s statements 26 of symptoms alone are not enough to establish the existence of a physical or mental impairment or 27 disability.”

Temple of 1001 Buddhas v. City of Fremont

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

culminating in the instant lawsuit.2 24 25 1 The complaint does not clearly … Legal Standard 24 Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, any person who, “under color of” state law, subjects any 25 person “to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities

Bernard v. Saul

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

At Step Two, an ALJ must determine whether a claimant has an impairment or 25 combination of impairments that qualify … Indeed, the evidence in the record considered clearly 8 and convincingly subverts Plaintiff’s claims of debilitating physical and mental conditions, and 9 thus the ALJ satisfied her burden under Smolen. 80 F.3d at

Barbizon School of San Francisco, Inc. INC. v. Sentinel Insurance Company Ltd

District Court, N.D. California · Mar 31, 2021

Physical Loss or Damage 17 The parties dispute whether Plaintiffs’ allegations establish loss and/or damage within the 18 Policies’ coverage. … These decisions have reasoned that the virus fails to cause physical 16 alteration of property because temporary loss of use of property (if any) during a pandemic and 17 while government orders are in effect does not qualify

Ji v. Naver Corporation

District Court, N.D. California · Oct 3, 2023

Further, “in a suit for damages, the mere 22 risk of future harm, standing alone, cannot qualify as a concrete harm.” … LINE Reply at 23 8 (bolding removed). 9 Plaintiff Shubert clearly alleges that LINE Corp. and LINE Plus “owned and operated the 10 B612 app” which collected

Hill v. Pacific Maritime Association

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 6, 2025

(Id.) 27 Such threadbare allegations “do not indicate that Plaintiffs would have qualified for paid sick 1 Technologies, Inc., 19-cv-06462-EMC, 2020 WL 3544982, at *3 (N.D. Cal. … However, “inaccurate 2 wage statements alone do not justify penalties; the plaintiffs must establish injury flowing from 3 the inaccuracy.” Maldonado v. Epsilon Plastics, Inc., 22 Cal.

Bonnie Jue v. Unum Group

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

establish some limitations on the application of 27 waiver and estoppel in the insurance context, they are not directly on point and do not clearly … Jue 14 has failed to establish that Unum engaged in “inequitable conduct” by failing to apprise her of 15 relevant facts or terms of her policy. 16 Second, Jue has failed to establish

Chung v. County of Santa Clara

District Court, N.D. California · Jul 12, 2022

Chung did not show a custom, policy, or practice to establish Monell 21 liability against the County. … Section 708 of the Charter 7 clearly states that employees can appeal their suspension, demotion, or removal to the Personnel 8 Board.2 See id., Ex. D.

Siqueiros v. General Motors LLC

District Court, N.D. California · Aug 31, 2022

GM also did not produce any documents illustrating GM’s 13 method for quantifying or qualifying “oil consumption complaints.” Mot. at 5. And Mr. … June 7, 2017) (describing the “longstanding 9 presumption that live testimony is clearly preferable to deposition testimony, especially for 10 important witnesses . . .”); Wilson v.