Case law

Brown v. Gore

District Court, S.D. California · May 3, 2022

Under these 22 statutes, the Court must sua sponte dismiss a prisoner’s IFP complaint, or any portion of 23 it, which is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks damages from defendants 24 who are immune … “To establish § 1983 liability, a plaintiff must show both 3 (1) deprivation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and 4 (2) that the deprivation was committed by a person acting under

Cleveland v. Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research Ltd

District Court, S.D. California · Nov 25, 2020

The 23 allegations are thus clearly superfluous with Plaintiffs’ breach of contract claim. … Indeed, Plaintiffs concede “[t]here is 5 . . . . clearly no specific funding level.” (Doc. No. 27 at 32:18-19.)

Radcliff v. San Diego Gas & Electric Company

District Court, S.D. California · Feb 12, 2021

The removing party bears the burden of establishing that 26 removal is proper. Gaus v. … Like sections 510 and 514, section 512 also expressly exempts 8 from its terms certain employees who are subject to qualifying CBAs. Lab. § 512(e)(1)- 9 (2).

Allen v. Diaz

District Court, S.D. California · Jan 27, 2022

. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A(b), the Court sua sponte must dismiss a 21 prisoner’s IFP complaint, or any portion of it, that is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a 22 claim, or seeks damages from immune defendants. … Hall, 64 F.3d 1276, 1279 (9th Cir. 1995) (“The right of 3 meaningful access to the courts extends to established prison grievance procedures.”), 4 overruled on other grounds by Shaw v.

Colorescience, Inc. v. Bouche

District Court, S.D. California · Nov 16, 2020

The Court concluded that Plaintiff had not established irreparable harm as well 12 as a likelihood of success on the merits because there were disputed issues of material 13 fact as to whether Defendant Stephen Bouche … (a)(3), a plaintiff can “seek restitution in equity, ordinarily in 1 the form of a constructive trust or an equitable lien, where money or property identified 2 as belonging in good conscience to the plaintiff could clearly

Williams & Cochrane, LLP v. Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Indian Reservation

District Court, S.D. California · May 27, 2020

May 14, 2009) (“The party seeking 9 to compel discovery has the burden of establishing that its request satisfies the 10 relevancy requirements of Rule 26(b)(1).”) 11 Federal Rule … What might have occurred 4 ||in the future between Plaintiff and the Tribe should not qualify or otherwise impact 5 || whether Plaintiff admits or denies the RFP.

Ramirez v. County of San Diego

District Court, S.D. California · May 7, 2024

Here, the Court finds that three of the five factors clearly support early discovery. 27 First, there is no preliminary injunction pending in this case, so the first factor weighs against 1 some of Plaintiff’s proposed … Defendants do not address Special Interrogatories 1-2 but 17 contend that Special Interrogatory 3 seeks information about employees who were not accused 18 of any constitutional violation and who have discretionary immunity

Arline v. Cornejo

District Court, S.D. California · Mar 23, 2022

“To establish § 1983 liability, a plaintiff must show 3 both (1) deprivation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, 4 and (2) that the deprivation was committed by a person acting under … ALL 12 PAYMENTS MUST BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME AND NUMBER 13 ASSIGNED TO THIS ACTION. 14 3.

Ali v. Franklin Wireless Corp.

District Court, S.D. California · Dec 19, 2024

“In most situations, unless the 8 settlement is clearly inadequate, its acceptance and approval are preferable to lengthy and 9 expensive litigation with uncertain results.” Nat’l Rural Telecomm. Coop. v. … In re Immune Response, 497 F.

Barrios v. San Diego County Sheriff's Dept

District Court, S.D. California · Aug 31, 2021

Under these statutes, the Court 21 must sua sponte dismiss a prisoner’s IFP complaint, or any portion of it, which is frivolous, 22 malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks damages from defendants who are immune. … “To establish § 1983 liability, a plaintiff must show both (1) deprivation of a 15 right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and (2) that the deprivation 16 was committed by a person acting under

Horton v. California Credit Corp. Retirement Plan

835 F. Supp. 2d 879 · District Court, S.D. California · Dec 7, 2011

The G-5 Form begins as follows: We have agreed to establish an open-end credit account for you, and you have agreed to give us a [mortgage/lien/security interest] [on/in] your home as security for the account. 12 C.F.R. § … Section 226.15(b)(5) states that the notice of right to rescind “shall ... clearly and conspicuously disclose ... the date the rescission period expires.” 12 C.F.R. § 226.15 (b)(5); see also 15 U.S.C. § 1635 (a).

Harper v. George Bailey Detention Facility

District Court, S.D. California · Jun 15, 2021

“To establish § 1983 liability, a Plaintiff must show both (1) 28 deprivation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and (2) 1 that the deprivation was committed by a person acting under … Should 9 Harper choose to file an amended complaint, he must clearly set forth the claims and 10 allegations against each defendant.

Estate of William Hayden Schuck v. County of San Diego

District Court, S.D. California · Jun 16, 2023

Identify the “Qualified Mental Health Provider” referenced within Hayden’s medical records, and described in the Complaint, as having 10 … Here, the Court finds that four of the five factors clearly 6 support early discovery.

Anh Van Thai v. County of Los Angeles

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

Mai are qualified under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 702. … P. 26(a)(2)(C). 8 “Treating physicians are clearly experts” where they will testify regarding their 9 medical opinions. Langermann v. Prop. & Cas. Ins.

Newton v. Eatmon

District Court, S.D. California · Apr 7, 2021

“To establish § 1983 liability, a plaintiff must show 2 both (1) deprivation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, 3 and (2) that the deprivation was committed by a person acting under … ALL PAYMENTS MUST BE CLEARLY 11 IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME AND NUMBER ASSIGNED TO THIS ACTION. 12 3. DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to serve a copy of this Order by U.S.

Moreno v. Vi-Jon, Inc.

District Court, S.D. California · Dec 6, 2021

“Where, as here, a case is at the pleading stage, the plaintiff must ‘clearly . . . allege 22 facts demonstrating” the existence of an injury in fact.” Id. (quoting Warth v. Seldin, 23 422 U.S. 490, 518 (1975)). … next to 22 the representations it qualifies”); Sponchiado v.

Fuller v. Kamara

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

Thus, while 12 prisoners may qualify to proceed IFP without having to pay the statutory filing fee in one 13 lump sum, they nevertheless remain obligated to pay the full amount due in monthly 14 payments. … Nothing in Plaintiff’s unsworn Complaint or her Motion establish that 17 she faces an immediate or credible threat or irreparable injury.

Persian Gulf Inc. v. BP West Coast Products LLC

District Court, S.D. California · Sep 27, 2019

Rosenfield does not qualify as an expert on 4 the issues of gasoline pricing because he lacks a graduate degree or any degree in finance 5 or economics.4 Plaintiff has not designated him as an expert but is using him … Detailed provisions 7 of Paragraph 8(d) of the Protective Order do not include a requirement that independent 8 experts pass the standard established by Daubert v.

Maycumber

District Court, S.D. California · Jun 4, 2026

At this step, a limited burden of 25 production shifts to the Social Security Administration to establish that the claimant can 26 perform this other work. … In reviewing an ALJ’s determination at the second stage of its analysis, the 22 reviewing court considers whether “the ALJ had substantial evidence to find that the 23 medical evidence clearly established that [the claimant

Mondragon v. County of San Diego

District Court, S.D. California · Aug 26, 2020

“To establish § 1983 liability, a plaintiff must show both (1) 8 deprivation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and (2) 9 that the deprivation was committed by a person acting under … ALL PAYMENTS MUST BE 1 || CLEARLY IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME AND NUMBER ASSIGNED TO THIS 2 || ACTION. 3 3.