Case law

Hernandez v. Arthur J. Gallagher Service Company, LLC

District Court, S.D. California · Aug 26, 2024

See In re Immune Resp. Sec. Litig., 20 497 F. Supp. 2d 1166, 1174 (S.D. … Supp. 3d at 1023 (quoting In re Immune Response Sec. Litig., 497 F. Supp. 2d 1166, 23 1177 (S.D.

McEwen v. Benedict

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

from a consumer debt; (2) the 17 defendant attempting to collect the debt qualifies as a “debt collector,” and; (3) the 18 defendant committed some act or omission in violation of the FDCPA. … Given that this situation 11 is clearly not encompassed by the FDCPA, the motions to dismiss the FDCPA claim are 12 GRANTED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. 13 3.

Duncan v. Becerra

265 F. Supp. 3d 1106 · District Court, S.D. California · Jun 29, 2017

STANDARD FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION The standard for issuing a preliminary injunction is well established and not in dispute. … The purpose and importance of that right was still fresh in their minds, and they spelled it out clearly so it would not be forgotten.

Gopher Media LLC v. Modern Doc Media

District Court, S.D. California · Jan 20, 2023

Thus, Plaintiff cannot establish a 13 probability of prevailing if the litigation privilege precludes a finding of liability on 14 Plaintiff’s fraud claim. … Trade secrets set out in “broad, categorical 6 terms, more descriptive of the types of information that generally may qualify as 7 protectable trade secrets” are insufficient.

Kimes v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation

District Court, S.D. California · Dec 13, 2021

Under these statutes, 16 the Court must sua sponte dismiss a prisoner’s IFP complaint, or any portion of it, which 17 is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks damages from defendants who are 18 immune … All 25 payments should be clearly identified by the name and number assigned to this action. 26 3.

Nguyen v. BMW of North America, LLC.

District Court, S.D. California · Jan 11, 2022

Plaintiff relies on Azteca 17 Construction to argue that “CAA’s procedural safeguards for ensuring selection of a 18 neutral arbitrator are laws established for a public reason.” … Thus, as in Kalasho, 12 “[t]he explicit language in [the arbitration clause] is sufficient to establish that the parties 13 clearly waived the application of state law to arbitration proceedings conducted under the 14

Hackelton v. Saul

District Court, S.D. California · Mar 23, 2021

To qualify for such 10 benefits, a claimant must establish (1) s/he suffers from a medically-determinable 11 ||impairment' which can be expected to result in death or has lasted or can be expected to 12 … No. 19-1, 6:22-24.) 17 ||However, here, the ALJ clearly stated a reason for his determination in each of the 18 || functional areas.

Sekerke v. Olsen

District Court, S.D. California · May 12, 2022

Compl. at 2, 4, 6, 7. 7 He clearly identifies Lt. … P&As at 30, because they fail to identify which of his 17 claims qualify.

Ramirez v. Zimmerman

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

See id. at 5 (“The County 5 clearly violated Rule 26 by failing to identify any such emails”). Plaintiffs do not expound 6 on this assertion in the argument section. Id. at 7-11. … Plaintiffs’ counsel then replied, in part, “Emails involving 4 the county clearly exist, and some were even turned over in the city’s production. . . .

Fitzgerald v. Pollard

District Court, S.D. California · Oct 28, 2024

Ultimately, “[i]n most situations, unless the settlement 13 is clearly inadequate, its acceptance and approval are preferable to lengthy and expensive 14 litigation with uncertain results.” Nat’l Rural Telecomms. … The 20 continued risk of litigation, the challenge of overcoming the hurdle of qualified immunity 21 as part of Defendants’ defenses, the possibility of not recovering any monetary award 22 particularly in light of

Veasley ex rel. Veasley v. United States

201 F. Supp. 3d 1190 · District Court, S.D. California · Aug 12, 2016

The Court concludes that the evidence at trial established life expectancy for Brianna of 68.1 years. ii. … Defendant contends that this amount “must be deducted from any judgment against the United States to avoid a double payment in violation of the waiver of sovereign immunity provided by the FTCA.

Allen v. Booth

District Court, S.D. California · Aug 13, 2020

Under these statutes, 17 the Court must sua sponte dismiss a prisoner’s IFP complaint, or any portion(s) of it, that 18 is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks damages from defendants who are 19 immune … The First Amendment to the United States Constitution, applicable to the states 24 through the Fourteenth Amendment, provides: “Congress shall make no law respecting an 25 establishment of religion, or prohibiting the

Davall v. Cordero

District Court, S.D. California · Nov 5, 2020

Under these statutes, 15 the Court must sua sponte dismiss a prisoner’s IFP complaint, or any portion of it, which 16 is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks damages from defendants who are 17 immune … ALL PAYMENTS MUST BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME 10 AND NUMBER ASSIGNED TO THIS ACTION. 11 3.

Estate of Ronnie Kong v. City of San Diego

District Court, S.D. California · Aug 2, 2023

Prob. 14 Code § 6402(b). 15 Plaintiff clearly brings Counts 4 and 6 as survival actions. … She alleges the 19 estate on whose behalf she asserts Counts 4 and 6 belongs to her decedent son, thereby 20 enabling this Court to infer she qualifies as a “beneficiary” under Cal. Prob.

Dorsey v. Paramo

District Court, S.D. California · Oct 15, 2020

[is] insufficient, 25 as a matter of law, to establish deliberate indifference.’” (quoting Jackson v. McIntosh, 90 26 F.3d 330, 332 (9th Cir. 1996)). … ALL PAYMENTS SHALL BE 21 CLEARLY IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME AND NUMBER ASSIGNED TO THIS 22 ACTION. 23 3.

Bernal

District Court, S.D. California · Sep 2, 2026

Plaintiff has attached a marked-up version of the SAC that clearly delineates the 3 differences between the SAC and TAC. (See [Doc. 35-1].) … Negligence Against the County 17 This Court does not need to decide whether the government provided the County 18 with sufficient notice of the negligence claim against them because the County is immune

Contreras v. Diaz

District Court, S.D. California · Jan 13, 2020

Plaintiff “presented his case establishing his innocence.” (Id.) … All payments must be clearly identified by the name and number 20 assigned to this action. 21 3.

Valdez v. Zhang

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

Under these 21 statutes, the Court must sua sponte dismiss a prisoner’s IFP complaint, or any portion of it, 22 which is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks damages from defendants who 23 are immune … ALL PAYMENTS MUST BE 15 CLEARLY IDENTIFIED BY THE NAME AND NUMBER ASSIGNED TO THIS 16 ACTION. 17 3.

Huynh v. Lizarraga

District Court, S.D. California · Mar 20, 2020

A state 8 ||court decision may involve an “unreasonable application” of clearly established federal 9 |! … Thus, the state court adjudication could not be 18 ||contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.

Schultz v. Saul

District Court, S.D. California · Feb 28, 2023

In response to a 22 question regarding side effects of medication, the opinion indicates the chemotherapy 23 causes neuropathy and compromised immune system. (AR 1074.) Dr. … Andrews is a doctor, he is 6 “qualified to answer two questions about possible psychological impacts on [Plaintiff’s] 7 physical condition.” (ECF 24 at 9 (citing Sprague v.