Case law

Bywalski v. United States

District Court, District of Columbia · May 13, 2022

Agreement, France was to pay $60 million to the United States to establish the compensation fund. Id., Article 4(1). … The United States moved to dismiss the Complaint based on a lack of subject matter jurisdiction, arguing that Plaintiff failed to establish that the United States had waived its sovereign immunity. See ECF No. 12.

United States ex rel. Fisher v. Network Software Associates

227 F.R.D. 4 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 22, 2005

Rather than state a claim based on defendants’ small business status, this sentence clearly refers to defendants’ status as a Section 8(a) entity. … Finally, although relator indicates that “Section 8(a) companies must qualify as small business concerns,” id.

Lewis v. District of Columbia

535 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 24, 2008

Finally, the court denies the plaintiffs request to qualify punitive damages as recoverable against the District of Columbia. II. BACKGROUND A. … Id. at 12 (noting that a mere assertion of failure to exhaust administrative remedies without more is “clearly *6 inadequate under prevailing regulations to establish a failure to exhaust administrative remedies”).

Azadeh v. the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 11, 2018

§ 1604 (conferring a broad grant of immunity “except as provided in sections 1605 to 1607 of this chapter”). … Circuit’s prior pronouncements establish. See Angellino, 688 F.3d at 773.

United States v. Orleans-Lindsay

572 F. Supp. 2d 144 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 25, 2008

O’Toole and Ric-co, both death penalty qualified attorneys, there was no need for his additional representation by a third, non-death penalty qualified attorney. … has further failed to establish that he is entitled to relief on that Motion.

Goldstein v. Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration

278 F. Supp. 3d 131 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 29, 2017

Moreover, Plaintiff also clearly exercised reasonable diligence in pursuing production of the Capes Disclosure, as his challenge to the IRS’ withholdings in Goldstein v. IRS is what resulted in its disclosure. … Those representations are sufficient to establish the adequacy of Defendant’s search. See Aguiar, 865 F.3d at 738-39 .

Totten v. Norton

421 F. Supp. 2d 115 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 21, 2006

Courts in this Circuit, however, have held that purely psychic injuries such as embarrassment do not qualify as adverse actions for purposes of federal anti-discrimination statutes. … The FTCA “grants federal district courts jurisdiction over claims arising from certain torts committed by federal employees in the scope of their employment, and waives the government’s sovereign immunity from such claims

B.R. Ex Rel. Rempson v. District of Columbia

524 F. Supp. 2d 35 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 3, 2007

But because the plaintiff fails only to clearly indicate the factual basis of the violation supporting her § 504 claim, the court grants the plaintiff leave to amend her complaint to clarify her factual allegations. II. … Id. ¶ 12. 1 DCPS did not respond, and the plaintiff placed B.R. at High Road School, a private establishment. Id.

Auburn Regional Medical Center v. Sebelius

686 F. Supp. 2d 55 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 11, 2010

or decision” — a point they consider established by the Baystate decisions issued by the Board and this Court. … Here, plaintiffs’ claims clearly arise under the Medicare Act — and hence are covered by § 405(h) — because they arise from the calculation of payments under the Medicare DSH provision and have as their ultimate goal the

Tanana Chiefs Conference v. Azar

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 15, 2022

Accordingly, to meet its burden of establishing that this Court has jurisdiction, TCC must show that it presented its claim to IHS in accordance with the CDA and that it now brings suit respecting that same claim. … Because the Court holds that TCC adequately presented its claim to IHS, it necessarily rejects the notion that this claim was a two-contract jumble irreconcilable with the demands TCC more clearly makes in its complaint

Eb5 Holdings Inc. v. Jaddou

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 20, 2024

In 1992, Congress enacted an alternative path through which a foreign investor could qualify for an EB-5 visa. … Supp. 2d 40, 48 (D.D.C. 2000) (“[I]t is well established that an interpretative guidance issued without formal notice and comment rulemaking can qualify as final agency action.”

Richardson v. Duke

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 17, 2023

“Under the clearly erroneous standard, the magistrate judge’s decision is entitled to great deference and is clearly erroneous only if on the entire evidence the court is left with the definite and firm conviction that … “Under the clearly erroneous standard, the magistrate judge’s decision is entitled to great deference and is clearly erroneous only if on the entire evidence the court is left with the definite and firm conviction that

Founding Church of Scientology v. Levi

579 F. Supp. 1060 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 4, 1982

After full examination of both the affidavits and the actual redacted documents, this Court is convinced that the documents at issue easily qualify as “investigatory records for law enforcement purposes.” … To establish the required confidentiality of a source under Exemption *1064 7(D), see Lesar v.

Krenzer v. Ford

429 F. Supp. 499 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 7, 1977

It is clear from evidence developed by discovery that females considered qualified were not appointed because of the “veterans only” policy. … GSA, 425 U.S. 820 , 96 S.Ct. 1961 , 48 L.Ed.2d 402 (1976), establishes Title VII as the sole statutory remedy against the Government for race or sex discrimination in employment.

Mostofi v. Napolitano

841 F. Supp. 2d 208 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 27, 2012

This established doctrine of “consular nonreviewability” is far-reaching. See Chun v. Powell, 223 F. … Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, 495 (1965) (“The entire fabric of the Constitution and the purposes that clearly underlie its specific guarantees demonstrate that the rights to marital privacy and to marry and raise a family

State of Alaska v. Department of the Interior

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 23, 2025

In June 2024, the Solicitor’s Office at Interior conducted a new analysis of the Ondola Allotment and concluded that it qualifies as Indian lands under the IGRA. See id. … The State’s action clearly falls in the second category.

Banner Health v. Sebelius

55 F. Supp. 3d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 7, 2014

An increase in the fixed loss threshold reduces the number of cases that will qualify for outlier payments as well as the amount of payments for qualifying cases. … As noted, the Secretary “establish[es] the fixed [loss] thresholds beyond which hospitals will qualify for outlier payments” at the start of each fiscal year. Cnty. of Los Angeles, 192 F.3d at 1009.

Spence v. United States Department of Veterans Affairs

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 12, 2022

In that regard, “[a]n employee’s decision to report discriminatory behavior cannot immunize [her] from those petty slights or minor annoyances that often take place at work and that all employees experience.” … The VA clearly spent an inordinate amount of time attempting to manage an unsatisfactory employee here, and her prolonged efforts to sue it have only compounded that expenditure.

Allied Progress v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

District Court, District of Columbia · May 4, 2017

The Court assesses each in turn, and finds that Plaintiff has failed to establish a likelihood of success on either element. 1. … Nevertheless, Plaintiff claims that the statement “clearly expresses plaintiff’s primary engagement as disseminating information so that it can fulfill 8 its mission.”

Pride v. U.S. Department of Agriculture

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 23, 2024

Legal Standard Plaintiffs bear the burden of establishing subject-matter jurisdiction. Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61 (1992). … “The statute defines the term ‘creditor’ to include the United States government, see 15 U.S.C. §§ 1691a(e), (f), and thereby waives the United States’ sovereign immunity for claims brought under the ECOA.”