Case law

Calderon v. United States Department of Agriculture

236 F. Supp. 3d 96 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 21, 2017

Exemption 6 protects from disclosure “personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6). … Finally, the agency must balance the privacy interest with the public interest and determine whether 31 disclosure “would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of

Salzman v. Islamic Republic of Iran

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 25, 2019

To establish subject-matter jurisdiction, an FSIA “plaintiff bears an initial burden of production to show [that] an exception to immunity, such as § 1605A, applies.” Owens, 864 F.3d at 784. … Supp. 3d at 205, and a plaintiff that offers proof sufficient to establish a waiver of sovereign immunity under § 1605A(a) has also established entitlement to relief as a matter of law. Id.

Evans v. Staples, Inc.

375 F. Supp. 3d 117 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 22, 2019

Service of Process Service here was clearly untimely. 2 Accordingly, I must determine whether there is good cause. … To establish a prima facie case of disparate treatment discrimination, a plaintiff must show: (1) she is a member of a protected class; (2) she was qualified for her position; (3) her employer took an adverse employment action

Azadeh v. the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 5, 2018

To qualify as torture, the mistreatment must be purposeful—that is, the defendant must have targeted the victim . . . .”). … Plaintiff’s captors also inflicted on her extreme mental pain and suffering that qualified as torture under the FSIA.

Fox Television Stations, Inc. v. Filmon X, LLC

150 F. Supp. 3d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 2, 2015

The regulations establish that § 111 is “clearly directed at localized transmission services.” See, e.g., 57 Fed. Reg. at 3290. … Nearly-Simultaneous Retransmissions To establish a copyright infringement claim, Plaintiffs must establish that they own valid copyrights over the broadcast programming and that any of their exclusive rights

American Lands Alliance v. Norton

242 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 30, 2003

Clearly there is no ambiguity about what the Secretary must do when a petition is filed to list a species under the ESA. … and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions found to be- (A) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (B) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity

United States v. Olson

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 15, 2026

He suggested several times that the witness ask for immunity to “delay” the investigation. Id. … ‘if you want to interview [my client], you must provide him immunity’ . . . . You really have to get a lawyer to call them and insist on immunity… it’s the only way to delay.”).

Promundo-Us v. Department of Health and Human Services

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 18, 2019

However, City of Houston establishes that the fiscal identity of funds is dispositive in cases involving yearly grant appropriations. … The specific res for those participants’ fourth budget period is clearly the 2018 TPPP appropriation.

Morgan v. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp.

172 F. Supp. 2d 98 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 23, 2001

Clearly, “neither the nonmovant’s conjecture and surmise nor mere ‘conclusory allegations of discrimination, without more’ are sufficient to defeat a motion for summary judgment.” Carney v. … JJ.), this document does not establish that an offer was made.

Searcy v. Vilsack

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 6, 2025

Assigning employees job duties and requiring them to perform those duties clearly meets that test. See, e.g., id. … But even assuming that qualifies as intentional use of force against another, it does not change the Court’s analysis.

Porter v. Fulgham

601 F. Supp. 2d 205 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 9, 2009

The remaining factors that the plaintiff must also establish to make out a ‘prima facie case are “that [ ]he was qualified for ... [and] considered for ... the promotion.” Id. … litigation, demonstrated by the fact that he deposed an Agency witnesses in September of 2001, only four months after the selection for the Administrative Officer position was made, Pl.’s Opp’n at 66, which the Court finds clearly

Aguilar v. Kempthorne

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 18, 2009

A nonmoving party, however, must establish more than “the mere existence of a scintilla of evidence” in support of its position. Id. at 252. … The plaintiff contends that her “non-selection, analyzed in conjunction with the extremely poor and clearly demonstrative statistics of Hispanic under-representation at the National Park Service at the GS-15 and above

In Re MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION

264 F.R.D. 7 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 1, 2010

The three senior Micron officers named as defendants in the Idaho litigation accordingly testified under immunity about their involvement in the price-fixing scheme, and several other Micron employees … While it might be true that what information is currently available to Plaintiffs establishes the basic fact that Micron admitted to criminal antitrust law violations, it is not for the Government to limit Plaintiffs’

Watts v. Alfred

794 F. Supp. 431 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 17, 1992

governmental employer, or to his employer’s discomfiture (at least on matters of public as opposed to personal concern), unless he does demonstrable damage to a legitimate government interest the employee is generally as immune … The Court finds Captain Watts’ protest was clearly on a subject of public concern; indeed, he entitled the subject matter of his protest: “Suppression of the Truth/Suppression of Freedom of Speech,” as he perceived the effect

Mason v. DaVita Inc.

542 F. Supp. 2d 21 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2008

To establish a prima facie case of discriminatory failure to promote, “the complainant must prove four elements: (1) that [he] was a member of a protected class; (2) that [he] applied for a job for which [he] was qualified … To establish a claim of retaliation, Mr.

Sociedad Anonima Viña Santa Rita v. United States Department of the Treasury

193 F. Supp. 2d 6 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 13, 2001

Of particular importance to this case, the ATF may establish an “American viti- *10 cultural area” (“AVA”) upon receipt of a qualifying petition from “any interested party.” 27 C.F.R. § 4 .25a(e)(2). … See id., Tab A (Petition to Establish ‘Santa Rita Hills’ AVA).

Tax Analysts v. Internal Revenue Service

215 F. Supp. 2d 192 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 27, 2002

A “genuine issue” is one whose resolution could establish an element of a claim or defense and, therefore, affect the outcome of the action. … The letter rulings at issue consist of factual information concerning the tax-exempt status of an organization, and are clearly “necessary to determine federal tax liability.”

Harris v. Howard University, Inc.

48 F. Supp. 2d 43 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 10, 1999

the fees incurred in establishing the right of indemnity.”). … The case therefore has no precedential value; although the panel’s thorough analysis clearly identifies the issues, the vacatur leaves no indication of whether the panel’s bottom-line ruling would likely be sustained or rejected

Schwebel v. Orrick

153 F. Supp. 701 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 12, 1957

claimed to be invalid, that his need is sufficiently compelling to justify judicial intervention even before the completion of the administrative process.” 12 Counsel for the government concedes that a case where it is clearly … The requirement of notice prior to revocation of permission to practice, pursuant to § 9(b), would not qualify or change the agency’s power to revoke authorization to practice.

Roman Catholic Archbishop of Washington v. Sebelius

19 F. Supp. 3d 48 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 20, 2013

If the Court and the government are incorrect about that and the church plan plaintiffs have not “established or maintained” the plan that they expressly aver they offer to their employees, then they clearly would not have … Third, plaintiffs have already self-identified as qualifying or not qualifying, and the only plaintiff that has self-identified as qualifying for the religious employer exemption at this point is the Archdiocese, which