Case law

Pierce v. Mansfield

530 F. Supp. 2d 146 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 10, 2008

Id. at 12 (noting that a mere assertion of failure to exhaust administrative remedies without more is “clearly inadequate under prevailing regulations to *154 establish a failure to exhaust administrative remedies”). … Even if the plaintiff establishes that he was best qualified for the Director position when he interviewed under announcement 04-35, the plaintiff still fails to establish that a reasonable juror could infer discriminatory

Ghori-Ahmad v. United States Commission on International Religious Freedom

969 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 17, 2013

At this stage, Ghori-Ahmad need not establish that every action she alleges was in fact materially adverse. … USCIRF also contends that the CAA does not waive sovereign immunity, and that Ghori-Ahmad failed to exhaust her administrative remedies with respect to the detrimental reliance claim. Id. at 12-15.

Lozansky v. Obama

841 F. Supp. 2d 124 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 26, 2012

Therefore Court does not reach the issues of sovereign immunity or the merits of the President’s actions. The Court will address mandamus jurisdiction as a component of the issue of standing. … argues Lozansky’s purported injuries do not arguably fall within the “zone of interests” protected by the statute because Jackson-Vanik amendment was intended to encourage free emigration, and Lozansky’s business interests clearly

Cause of Action Institute v. Export-Import Bank of the United States

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 23, 2021

The deliberative nature of the reports can be established far more quickly. … Disclosure of the withheld email addresses, accordingly, “would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6). C.

Mulrain v. Donovan

900 F. Supp. 2d 62 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 29, 2012

consider expert testimony rating the comparative qualifications of the plaintiff and the selectees in part because “rating procedures were not used in the selection process under review at any stage”).1 The evidence clearly … It is well established that “[i]t is the perception of the decisionmaker which is relevant.” Waterhouse, 124 F. Supp. 2d at 7.

International Thunderbird Gaming Corp. v. United Mexican States

473 F. Supp. 2d 80 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 14, 2007

law ignored by the arbitrators was well defined, explicit, and clearly applicable to the case.” … This court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. 28 U.S.C. § 1605 (a)(1),(6).

Payne v. District of Columbia Government

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 29, 2010

municipal liability for the District of Columbia under 42 U.S.C. § 1983; that the individual defendants enjoy qualified immunity under § 1983; that Payne has failed to allege a prima facie case of hostile work environment … failed to overcome the individual Defendants’ entitlement to qualified immunity.

Selig v. Islamic Republic of Iran

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 22, 2021

The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) “establishes a general rule granting foreign sovereigns immunity from the jurisdiction of United States courts . . . … The terrorism exception in 28 U.S.C. § 1605A establishes two threshold showings for waiver of sovereign immunity.

Zavadovsky v. Republic of Austria

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2026

Next, Federal Defendants argue that Plaintiffs’ RICO claims are barred by qualified immunity and the judicial proceedings privilege, see id. at 23–26, and that in any event, Plaintiffs fail to plausibly plead those claims … immunity, or based on the judicial proceedings privilege.

Granite Reinsurance Company, Ltd v. Frohman

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 17, 2009

In response, RMA/FCIC claims it has sovereign immunity except to the extent that immunity is waived by statute, and since the only statute authorizing suit against the FCIC, 7 U.S.C. § 1506, vests exclusive original jurisdiction … Simply sated, “abstention is clearly improper when a federal suit alleges claims within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts.” Andrea Theatres, Inc. v.

United States House of Representatives v. Burwell

130 F. Supp. 3d 53 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 9, 2015

Specifically, these “cost-sharing” provisions require insurance companies that offer qualified health plans through the ACA to reduce the out-of-pocket cost of insurance coverage for policyholders who qualify. … That important fact clearly distinguishes this case. As discussed below, the injury here is sufficiently concrete and particularized as to the whole House.

Analysas Corp. v. Bowles

827 F. Supp. 20 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 23, 1993

; firms must fall below the industry’s ceiling in order to qualify as small businesses for that particular SIC code. … However, all but one of these letters clearly contemplates that SBA will use standard notice and comment procedures.

In Re: Navy Chaplaincy

69 F. Supp. 3d 249 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 26, 2014

In addition, chaplains must be endorsed by a faith-group endorsing agency as qualified to represent that particular faith group within the Chaplain Corps. … The party seeking summary judgment "bears the heavy burden of establishing that the merits of his case are so clear that expedited action is justified."

United States v. Jones

918 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 23, 2013

First, the government’s response clearly explains how Agent Eicher determined the direction of the pie-shaped wedges. … Indeed, Judge Urbina of this Court recently denied a defendant’s request for a Daubert hearing and qualified Agent Eicher as a cell site analysis expert. See United States v.

Brook v. Teti

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 17, 2023

Deliberative Process Privilege To qualify for the deliberative process privilege, a document must be “both predecisional and deliberative.” Machado Amadis v. U.S. Dep’t of State, 971 F.3d 364, 370 (D.C. … Circuit has further explained, [t]o establish that the release of information contained in government files would result in a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy, the court first asks whether disclosure

Coors Brewing Co. v. Calderon

225 F. Supp. 2d 22 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 6, 2002

The only brewer qualifying for the unchanged lower tax rate is the only brewery on the island of Puerto Rico: Cervecería India. 2 The new progressive tax for brewers went into effect on June 14, 2002. … Moreover, even if Coors could establish a causal connection between the loss in market share and the *24 tax increase, it would still need to prove the impact on the company's profitability. 5 .

Judicial Watch, Inc. v. United States Department of Justice

118 F. Supp. 3d 266 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 31, 2015

Cir. 2008) (noting records withheld under Exemption 5 must be inter- or intra-agency records “‘unavailable by law’ under one of the established civil discovery privileges.”). The parties do not dispute that Ms. … Whether its immunity from discovery is absolute or qualified, a 8 protected document cannot be said to be subject to ‘routine’ disclosure.” Grolier, Inc., 462 U.S.

Rosell v. Kelliher

468 F. Supp. 2d 39 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2006

The essential functions of a Senior Auditor are clearly outlined by the Office of the Chief Accountant in its official description of the position. … Simply stated, plaintiff cannot establish a prima facie case of discrimination under the Rehabilitation Act.

United States v. Scanzani

392 F. Supp. 3d 210 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 15, 2019

That standard is clearly met here. The first image depicts what appears to be two blurry screen shots of the lower half of a naked infant boy. … And while possession of child pornography or child erotica is clearly evidence of the state of mind of the target, it is much less clear what else would qualify.

Crawford-El v. Britton

844 F. Supp. 795 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 15, 1994

To survive a defense of qualified immunity, a claim of a constitutional violation by a government official which turns on the official’s motive must meet the heightened pleading standard established in this Circuit. … Accordingly, defendants’ motion to dismiss Crawford-El’s First Amendment claim on qualified immunity grounds shall be granted for failure to meet the heightened pleading standard. B.