Case law

Rials v. Grijalva

District Court, S.D. California · Nov 10, 2020

Ashcroft v. … See Lira v.

Egrovich v. CCFG Costebelle La Jolla, LLC

District Court, S.D. California · Feb 16, 2022

Brokerage Co. v. Darden Rests., Inc., 213 F.3d 474, 480 (9th Cir. 2000) 25 (quoting Houghton v. … Hicks v.

Nelson v. Sorrento Tower Apartments

District Court, S.D. California · Dec 14, 2021

Franklin v. … Bell Atlantic Corp. v.

CliniComp International, Inc. v. Cerner Corporation

District Court, S.D. California · Feb 3, 2023

Highmark Inc. v. Allcare Health Mgmt. Sys., Inc., 572 14 U.S. 559, 563 (2014); see Thermolife Int’l LLC v. … See Octane Fitness, LLC v.

Pacham

District Court, S.D. California · Dec 17, 2025

Hamdi v. … Leonardo v.

Sikking v. Housing of Urban Development (HUD)

District Court, S.D. California · Feb 1, 2021

See Ivey v. 8 Board of Regents of the Univ. of Alaska, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir.1982). 9 A Rule12(b)(6) motion to dismiss tests the sufficiency of the complaint. 10 Navarro v. … Warren v.

McAdams v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC

District Court, S.D. California · Aug 25, 2022

Owens v. … Russell v.

Williams v. Pollard

District Court, S.D. California · Dec 20, 2019

Board of 8 Regents of the University of Alaska, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982). 9 Finally, the “[c]ourt[] must consider the complaint in its entirety,” including 10 “documents incorporated into the complaint … See Lira v.

Fernandez v. MCC

District Court, S.D. California · Sep 14, 2020

Ivey v. Board of 16 Regents of the University of Alaska, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982). 17 B. … See Lira v.

Sekerke v. City of National City

District Court, S.D. California · Nov 4, 2019

Board of 15 Regents of the University of Alaska, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982). 16 B. Discussion 17 1. … See Mann v.

Sumana Forest Retreat, et al. v. County of San Diego, et al.

District Court, S.D. California · Jun 24, 2026

Major Use Permit applications must be approved by the County Board of 23 Supervisors or Planning Commission. TAC ¶ 63. … Hernandez v.

Springs v. Raber

District Court, S.D. California · Apr 4, 2022

Brown v. Valoff, 422 F.3d 926, 935 (9th Cir. 2005) 2 (emphasis in original) (citing Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 739 (2001)). … See Andres v.

The Estate of Dominique McCoy by and through its Court Appointed Administrator William McCoy v. County of San Diego, et al.

District Court, S.D. California · Apr 27, 2026

Tolan v. … Burrell v. Board of Trustees of Ga.

Shufeldt v. Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, P.C.

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

Bittaker v. … See Elia v.

Pilant v. Caesars Enterprise Services, LLC

District Court, S.D. California · Dec 1, 2020

Lewis v. … Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. 10 Brown, 564 U.S. 915, 923 (2011) (quoting Int’l Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316 11 (1945) (internal quotations omitted)).

Millete v. Chula Vista Police Department

District Court, S.D. California · Sep 25, 2024

Shroyer v. … Comm’rs v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397, 5 407 (1997).

Kendall v. Odonate Therapeutics, Inc.

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

Brown v. China Integrated Energy, Inc., 2015 WL 9 12720322, *14 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 17, 2015) (quoting In re Juniper Networks, Inc. Sec. 10 Litig., 264 F.R.D at 588). … See Rodriguez v.

Allen v. Cardenas

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

Board of 9 Regents of the University of Alaska, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982). 10 B. … Pratt v.

LifeVoxel Virginia SPV, LLC v. LifeVoxel.AI, Inc.

District Court, S.D. California · Dec 30, 2024

Schueneman v. … Va. 2012) (interpreting Dunn to hold that the Virginia law does not have an 25 element of causation); Brown v. Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., 2009 WL 4809426, at *6 26 (D. S.C.

Massaro v. Beyond Meat, Inc.

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

Goodyear Dunlop Tires 6 Operations, S.A. v. Brown, 564 U.S. 915, 923 (2011) (quoting Int’l Shoe Co. v. Washington, 7 326 U.S. 310, 316 (1945) (internal quotations omitted)). … Brown v. MCI WorldCom 6 Network Servs., Inc., 277 F.3d 1166, 1172 (9th Cir. 2002). 7 The Court concludes the primary jurisdiction doctrine does not support a stay.