Case law

Allard v. Holder

840 F. Supp. 2d 269 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 13, 2012

“Under Rule 12(b)(1), the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that the court has jurisdiction.” Grand Lodge of Fraternal Order of Police v. Ashcroft, 185 F.Supp.2d 9, 13 (D.D.C.2001). ANALYSIS I. … Plaintiffs also contend that the federal section’s “legislative history clearly shows that Congress intended the language to be read inclusively” and that “Congress explicitly waived sovereign immunity” for disparate-impact

I.A.M. National Pension Fund v. Wakefield Industries, Inc.

612 F. Supp. 643 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 13, 1985

It has been established, at least since United States v. … This principle of separation was clearly enunciated by this Circuit in Daylo v. Administrator of Veterans Affairs, 501 F.2d 811 (D.C.Cir.1974).

Manning v. Abington Rockland Joint Water Works

357 F. Supp. 3d 106 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 4, 2019

The EEOC was clearly aware and acknowledged that there might have been other charges raised within Ms. Manning's Complaint as to which it failed to make findings. … This request is clearly not finite, nor does it suggest a request for any kind of accommodation aside from the problematic leave itself. Moreover, Ms.

D'amore v. Small Business Administration

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 1, 2024

In an email she sent to her contact at SBA after the introductory session, she remarked at how “frustrating” it can be “for all parties” to find qualified interpreters. SAC, Ex. 7 at 2. … But after SBA moved to dismiss her damage claims on the ground that the United States had not waived its sovereign immunity to those claims, the Court granted D’Amore leave to amend her complaint to omit any claim for monetary

Alvarez v. Keystone Plus Construction Corporation

303 F.R.D. 152 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 11, 2014

Accordingly, the Court concludes that the predominance requirement is clearly met in this case. 2. … The attorney’s fees provisions were a part of the Settlement Agreement itself, and the terms were also clearly stated in the notice form that was sent out to the class members.

Hirshon v. Republic of Bolivia

979 F. Supp. 908 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 19, 1997

agreement, and the subsequent return of any remaining supplemental funds to Bolivia, will destroy his ability to obtain satisfaction of any judgment in his favor in his individual suit because the terms of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities … It is well-established that a trial court may retain jurisdiction over the enforcement and administration of a settlement agreement after issuing a final judgment. See Beckett v.

Finca Santa Elena, Inc. v. United States Army Corps of Engineers

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 6, 2015

Id. at 929 (“While we recognize that it may be too late to correct problems that the requisite environmental review might have identified, we are not convinced that all the problems identified by such a review would be immune … Although Finca and Román Más complain that the uncertainty has inhibited the likes of Wal-Mart and Walgreens from purchasing their property, this circuit’s precedent clearly considers such hardships insufficient to establish

Jefferson v. Harris

170 F. Supp. 3d 194 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 21, 2016

Third, they argue that the individual Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. Because the Court agrees with Defendants’ first two arguments, it need not reach the last. … To establish standing, a party must, at a constitutional minimum, meet the following criteria.

Kilpatrick v. Paige

193 F. Supp. 2d 145 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 25, 2002

Circuit has clearly held that “[wjhere a case turns on a construction of a contract, the district court may decide the matter on summary judgment if the agreement ‘admits of only one reasonable interpretation.’ ” Saksenasingh … The class complaint contains allegations that clearly implicate the plaintiffs claims at bar because it specifically “alleges that the system by which promotions are made at DOE has adversely affected black professional employees

Toledo v. United States

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 17, 2022

“Qualifying losses” include a variety of injuries. Jd. § 1980A(b)(1). Relevant here, “the inability to carry out the activities of daily living resulting from traumatic injury to the brain” is a “qualifying loss.” … Plaintiff points to statements he submitted from two first-hand witnesses— a squadron Flight Surgeon, Vincent Peronti, and LT Michael Lynch—that he argues support his eligibility for benefits because they “clearly list out

Morton v. United States Parole Commission

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 6, 2018

Commission observes that the Notice of Action from Morton’s April 7, 2016 hearing begins by stating that the 1987 Guidelines were being applied, before proceeding to evaluate his suitability for parole under the framework established … Under the guidelines Morton contends should have been applied,5 set-offs beyond twelve months can clearly be ordered. See Shakir v. Fulwood, 108 F.

Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Sebelius

856 F. Supp. 2d 196 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 23, 2012

Since Barr, Mylan, and Ranbaxy were not first filers as to patent ‘346 and Watson was not a first filer as to patent ‘516, none of them qualified to share exclusivity with Teva USA. … Cir. 2005), offers no support, as the Court of Appeals rejected this argument since the defendant was not protected by Eleventh Amendment immunity.

Klayman v. Judicial Watch, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 7, 2018

The portion of the contract signed in December 1996 is clearly legible; the last page of the MOU signed in November 1996 is not. However, that last page appears to be a signed version of the penultimate page of the MOU. … Establishing that this record meets the requirements for the hearsay exception would give more than adequate proof of its authenticity. 2 Foundation would include testimony that Mr.

Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. v. Schweiker

559 F. Supp. 658 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 2, 1983

Named plaintiffs have interests co-extensive with, and not antagonistic to, absent class members, and each plaintiff’s attorney is clearly qualified, experienced and able to conduct this litigation. … In order to determine whether she is qualified to receive services from the clinic, a minor would be required to obtain financial information from her parents.

Verplanck v. England

257 F. Supp. 2d 182 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 9, 2003

The DAJAG stated that because the plaintiff had not contested the debt at the time of separation, an investigation was not mandated, but since the plaintiff was now clearly disputing the debt, an investigation should be conducted … 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

McGregor Printing Corp. v. Kemp

802 F. Supp. 519 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 1992

The regulation clearly requires 75% blind labor for the production of all commodities produced, not per product. … Plaintiff argues that the provision in the JWOD Act, which authorizes the Committee to establish a procurement list of “commodities produced by” qualified nonprofit agencies, means that the workshops must already be producing

Webster v. United States Department of Energy

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 10, 2020

Looking first at the denial of a promotion in May 2011, the agency clearly had legitimate reasons for refusing to promote Ms. Webster from GS-13, Step 3 to GS-14. … Webster was subjected to a hostile work environment, summary judgment for the defense is clearly appropriate.

Easaw v. Newport

253 F. Supp. 3d 22 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 12, 2017

COA has spoken clearly and unmistakably to the current state of D.C. law, its views must govern. … Circuit is no more qualified than this Court to ascertain. 8 Second, applying an outdated and incorrect interpretation of D.C. law by the D.C.

Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. United Rentals (N. Am.), Inc.

305 F. Supp. 3d 223 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 2018

First, she pointed to alternative contractual provisions that clearly and expressly limit coverage to cases of vicarious liability. Id. … A divide also exists as to whether fronting policies that approximate self-insurance qualify as "other insurance." See, e.g., Air Liquide Am. Corp. v. Cont'l Cas.

Kline v. Cobert

District Court, District of Columbia · May 23, 2020

Kline was more qualified than Mr. Hickman, all that matters is that her employer believed Mr. Hickman was more qualified. Ms. … whether the complained-of action constitutes an adverse action or when there is clearly no adverse action at all.