Case law

Query v. MAXIM INTEGRATED PRODUCTS, INC.

558 F. Supp. 2d 969 · District Court, N.D. California · May 15, 2008

The PSLRA establishes a rebuttable presumption that the “most adequate plaintiff’ is the proposed lead plaintiff with the “largest financial interest in the relief sought by the class” that “otherwise satisfies the requirements … FTP Software, Inc., 939 F.Supp. 57, 60 (D.Mass.1996) ("The test of [the Reform Act for the appointment of lead plaintiff] clearly indicates that this issue is one over which only potential plaintiffs may be heard.”).

Pries v. City of Antioch

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 10, 2023

To overcome defendants’ 27 affirmative defense of qualified immunity, plaintiff must show that “(1) they violated a federal 1 established at the time.” Nunes v. … Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity at this stage. 20 B.

Young v. Gipson

163 F. Supp. 3d 647 · District Court, N.D. California · Sep 11, 2015

Section 2254(d)(1) restricts the source of clearly established law to the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence. … Musladin, 549 U.S. at 74-77, 127 S.Ct. 649 (denying habeas relief in absence of clearly established federal law).

Maddox v. County of San Mateo

746 F. Supp. 947 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 26, 1990

Plaintiff engaged in the following activities qualifying for protection under § 704(a): filing discrimination charges against the County under Title VII in 1980 and 1982; filing discrimination complaints with the EEOC, which … In order to make out a § 1985 claim, plaintiff must allege that defendants conspired to deprive him of equal protection of the laws or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws.

Manaka v. Monterey Sardine Industries, Inc.

48 F. Supp. 625 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 2, 1942

its opinion in Ex parte Don Ascanio Colorína. 4 There the petition of the Italian Ambassador for a writ of prohibition and mandamus, directed to the United States District Court for the purpose of clothing with sovereign immunity … in the courts of this country notwithstanding the existence of a state of war.” 16 The early decisions in the United States clearly permitted aliens from enemy countries resident here to prosecute or defend actions in the

Bayview Hunters Point Community Advocates v. Metropolitan Transportation Commission

177 F. Supp. 2d 1011 · District Court, N.D. California · Nov 9, 2001

Thus, traceability is clearly met for Plaintiffs’ alleged aesthetic and economic injuries resulting from elevated levels of smog. … Second, as public records, the documents underlying Yung’s declaration qualify as exceptions to the hearsay rules under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8) and are therefore admissible.

Utility Reform Network v. California Public Utilities Commission

26 F. Supp. 2d 1208 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 1, 1997

Section 1983 Section 1983 imposes liability on anyone who, under color of state law, deprives a person of “any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.” 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . … Because the end-user surcharge does not impose a burden on interstate commerce that is clearly excessive in relation to local benefits, it does not violate the Commerce Clause.

Bates v. Jones

904 F. Supp. 1080 · District Court, N.D. California · Oct 19, 1995

The instant case is clearly distinguishable. … However, Plaintiffs have not established that they are likely to prevail, and therefore have also failed to establish that they are likely to be irreparably injured.

United States v. Baires-Reyes

191 F. Supp. 3d 1046 · District Court, N.D. California · Jun 7, 2016

The Government argues that because attempted Hobbs Act robbery qualifies as a crime of violence, conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery should also qualify as a crime of violence. Mot. to Dismiss Opp. at 5-6. … Accordingly, Johnson’s, holding with respect to the imprecision of the serious potential risk standard is also clearly applicable to § 16(b).” Id. at 1116-17.

Sonier v. CDCR

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 10, 2025

Analysis CDCR, as an agency of the state, is generally immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment. See, e.g., Munoz v. … His use of the section 1983 claim form does not preclude his clearly stated ADA claim. See O’Guinn v. Lovelock Corr.

Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Lynch

216 F. Supp. 2d 1016 · District Court, N.D. California · Jul 25, 2002

Pursuant to the Supreme Court’s analysis of state sovereign immunity in Idaho v. … For better or worse, the Act establishes a rate-regulation, filed-tariff system for common-carrier communications, and the [FCC]’s desire “to ‘increase competition’ cannot provide [it] authority to alter the well-established

Perez v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

929 F. Supp. 2d 988 · District Court, N.D. California · Mar 8, 2013

Therefore, to establish standing under the UCL a plaintiff must “(1) establish a loss or deprivation of money sufficient to qualify as injury in fact, i.e., economic injury, and (2) show that the economic injury was the result … To establish a violation of Section 17200, a plaintiff may establish a violation under any one of three prongs.

Perkins v. Linkedin Corp.

53 F. Supp. 3d 1222 · District Court, N.D. California · Nov 13, 2014

The reminder emails also clearly refer to a product or service—namely, Linkedln. … These cases, Defendant argues, establish that the First Amendment protects advertisements of protected works because the commercial promotion is “adjunct” or “incidental” to the underlying protected expression. Id.

Reed-Milton

District Court, N.D. California · Feb 25, 2026

immunity 20 with respect to claims brought under § 1983 in federal court, . . . and the Supreme Court has held 21 that § 1983 was not intended to abrogate a State’s Eleventh Amendment immunity.” … The party who seeks federal jurisdiction “bears the burden of 6 establishing subject matter jurisdiction.” Ashoff v.

Arellano v. Becton

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

Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11 (1991) (“judicial immunity is an immunity from suit, 2 not just from ultimate assessment of damages. … initiation of judicial proceedings, may not be 5 entitled to absolute immunity, but is protected by qualified immunity.

Gradetech, Inc. v. City of San Jose

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 16, 2021

Id. at 4-5. 19 Thus, Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. Id. at 5. … The Ninth 20 Circuit did not instruct the Court to grant leave to amend finding that amendment would be 21 futile “given the lack of clearly established law.”

Smith v. Watanabe

District Court, N.D. California · Sep 27, 2022

(rejecting 18 quasi-judicial immunity, legislative immunity, qualified immunity, lack of involvement in 19 allegedly discriminatory conduct, and Eleventh Amendment Immunity as defenses for the county 20 and individual … So the Court’s finding that Plaintiffs fail to establish subject 4 || matter jurisdiction in the face of Defendants’ invocation of sovereign immunity also bars 5 || Plaintiffs’ claim for injunctive relief.

Dyer v. City and County of San Francisco

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

immunity analysis. … Nor could she overcome the qualified immunity hurdle, given the 6 || lack of clear authority requiring officers to respond immediately to any complaint by a detainee 7 that his or her cuffs are too tight.

Shabazz v. Broomfield

District Court, N.D. California · Apr 25, 2023

ASSIGNED ISSUES 2 AND 3: PREP ACT IMMUNITY AND QUALIFIED 1 IMMUNITY 2 In an Order dated July 15, 2022 (Dkt. … June 7, 2022). 10 This immunity is well-established.

Mills v. Broomfield

District Court, N.D. California · Apr 25, 2023

ASSIGNED ISSUES 2 AND 3: PREP ACT IMMUNITY AND QUALIFIED 1 IMMUNITY 2 In an Order dated July 15, 2022 (Dkt. … June 7, 2022). 10 This immunity is well-established.