Case law

Surfrider Foundation v. Dalton

989 F. Supp. 1309 · District Court, S.D. California · Jan 13, 1998

“[A]n agency must have discretion to rely on the reasonable opinions of its own qualified experts even if, as an origina] matter, a court might find contrary views more persuasive.” Id. … The EA concedes that San Mateo Point is clearly visible from the park’s public access area. AR 62:2152:15668.

Feigel v. Federal Deposit Insurance

935 F. Supp. 1090 · District Court, S.D. California · May 22, 1996

Each of the individual plaintiffs qualified for benefits under the Plan at the time of its 1987 adoption by virtue of having served three or more years on the board of directors. (Id. at ¶ 13). … In order to accomplish this task, Congress clearly intended the exhaustion requirements to apply to all claims, regardless of when the underlying acts relating to those claims occurred.

Jeffries v. Olesen

121 F. Supp. 463 · District Court, S.D. California · May 13, 1954

favorably to-the evidence is that the physician called, by the Solicitor expressed an honest, difference of opinion on a matter with, respect to which any married layman, including plaintiff, is by actual experience presumably qualified … Pinkus, supra, “emphasize [s] the importance of limiting Postoffice Department orders to instances where actual fraud is clearly proved.” 338 U.S. at page 277 , 70 S.Ct. at page 115. For here, as in Reilly v.

Williams v. Newsom

District Court, S.D. California · Feb 11, 2021

ALL PAYMENTS SHALL BE CLEARLY 21 IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME AND NUMBER ASSIGNED TO THIS ACTION. 22 3. … DISMISSES Defendant California Correctional Healthcare Services for 5 seeking monetary relief against immune defendants pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

Hau v. Berryhill

District Court, S.D. California · Mar 24, 2020

In other words, “an impairment that manifests only some of those criteria, 16 no matter how severely, does not qualify.” Id. … The 5.06 Listing is clear and specific, and the evidence 5 ||clearly establishes, as Judge Block demonstrated, that the Plaintiff does not meet the 6 Listing.

Pervoe v. Macomber

District Court, S.D. California · Sep 9, 2025

“Under Winter, plaintiffs must establish 23 that irreparable harm is likely, not just possible, in order to obtain a preliminary injunction.” 24 All. for the Wild Rockies v. … dismiss an 18 in forma pauperis complaint that is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks 19 damages from defendants who are immune

Gilbert v. California Department of CDCR

District Court, S.D. California · Dec 29, 2021

Under the AEDPA, a federal court 4 may not grant a habeas petition on any matter adjudicated on the merits by a state court 5 unless that decision was: (1) contrary to or involved an unreasonable application of clearly … Sykes, 433 U.S. 72, 81 (1977) (“[I]t is a well- 3 established principle of federalism that a state decision resting on an adequate foundation 4 of state substantive law is immune from review in the federal courts.”); see

San Diego County Lodging Association v. The City of San Diego

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

“A contradiction is generally found only when the state and local acts 11 are irreconcilable, clearly repugnant, and so inconsistent that the two cannot have 12 concurrent operation.” … Plaintiff SDCLA has not met 22 its burden to show that the Ordinance and section 2922 are “irreconcilable, clearly 23 repugnant, and so inconsistent that the two cannot have concurrent operation.”

Mozingo v. Japan Airlines Co., Ltd

District Court, S.D. California · Jan 9, 2020

OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY 14 JAPAN AIRLINES CO., LTD., a foreign OF SAN DIEGO company (Japan) that is duly qualified … “First, a court 16 may exercise federal-question jurisdiction where a federal right or immunity is ‘an element, 17 and an essential one, of the plaintiff’s cause of action.’” Id.

LG Infocomm U.S.A., Inc. v. Euler American Credit Indemnity Co.

419 F. Supp. 2d 1248 · District Court, S.D. California · Jan 12, 2005

Clearly, there exists ‘a genuine issue ... under California lavf until the meaning of Garvey’s footnote 7 is resolved. 2 Cal.App.4th at 1205-06 , 10 Cal.Rptr.2d 352 (internal citations omitted). … The court in In re Shook qualified the foregoing language by stating that a "deemed allowed” claim is only "prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the creditor's claim”, and that if an objection is filed by the

Ryan

District Court, S.D. California · Jun 18, 2026

action brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 14 § 1915(a) and dismiss any case it finds “frivolous or malicious,” “fails to state a claim on 15 which relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … to dismiss 3 a claim based on an indisputably meritless legal theory, but also the unusual power to pierce 4 the veil of the complaint’s factual allegations and dismiss those claims whose factual 5 contentions are clearly

Latimer v. United States

52 F. Supp. 228 · District Court, S.D. California · Oct 25, 1943

Some of it falls clearly within the terms of regulations involved, while other activities can not be so regarded. … The test for ascertaining whether or not the services in this subdivision should be considered “agricultural labor” is that established in Stuart v.

21st Century Financial Services, LLC v. Manchester Financial Bank

255 F. Supp. 3d 1012 · District Court, S.D. California · Jun 8, 2017

Proposed shareholders may qualify as owners for purposes of alter ego liability. See Tatung Co., Ltd. v. Shu Tze Hsu, 217 F.Supp.3d 1138, 1177 (C.D. Cal. 2016). … Accordingly, the references appear to be to the partnership. , As discussed below, Gibbons’s testimony was unclear, so this fact has not been established as clearly as 21st Century contends. .

United States v. Standard Oil Co.

78 F. Supp. 850 · District Court, S.D. California · Jun 28, 1948

It is canalized in the narrow channel which the facts in the case established. … Clearly, the minority, led by Mr.

Southern Natural Resources, LLC v. Nations Energy Solutions, Inc

District Court, S.D. California · Jun 30, 2023

admitted and qualify or deny the rest.” … Pa. 1960)). 20 The Court tends to agree that TGHPL has not clearly established relevancy of the five-year 21 period after the execution of the APA and how Reed Smith LLP’s potential representation 22 may relate to the

Schick Dry Shaver, Inc. v. Wotoshaver, Inc.

25 F. Supp. 346 · District Court, S.D. California · Nov 12, 1938

The record on said appeal included all said eleven prior art patents, which, together with their exhibit numbers herein, are: All these patents, with the exception of the British patent to Appleyard, No. 753, clearly have … Neither of the hair clippers physically introduced in evidence heréin as defendants' Exhibits 1 and 2 in any way anticipates or qualifies any of the claims here relied on of any of the three patents in suit. 27.

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Champion-Cain

District Court, S.D. California · Mar 12, 2020

All 2 bidders must be qualified by 5:00 p.m. … On March 11, 2020 the Receiver filed 8 a Notice of Non-Receipt of Qualified Overbids Regarding the Carmel Property Motion. 9 ECF No. 270.

Whitten v. Brennan

District Court, S.D. California · Oct 28, 2019

As to her futility argument, Plaintiff states that “[f]utility is shown where the EEOC 24 . . . will clearly reject the claims brought forth, despite the showing made by the claimant.” 25 Id. … In Gulf Restoration Network, however, the Fifth 9 Circuit concluded that the plaintiffs did not qualify for, let alone argue for the application 10 of, any established exception to the exhaustion requirement. 683 F.3d

Cooper v. Nicholas

District Court, S.D. California · Nov 18, 2024

Thus, while 6 prisoners may qualify to proceed IFP without having to pay the statutory filing fee in one 7 lump sum, they nevertheless remain obligated to pay the full amount due in monthly 8 payments. … ALL PAYMENTS MUST BE CLEARLY 24 IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME AND NUMBER ASSIGNED TO THIS ACTION. 25 3.

Allen v. Similasan Corp.

306 F.R.D. 635 · District Court, S.D. California · Mar 30, 2015

Krosnick is well-educated and highly qualified in his field of expertise. See Krosnick Deck 28-116, ECF 100-3. A large part of Dr. … Ascertainability Defendant argues that Plaintiffs’ proposed class is not clearly ascertainable because each putative class member must self-identify. Def.’s Opp’n 17-20.