Case law

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.

Alexander v. Washington Gas Light Co.

481 F. Supp. 2d 16 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 23, 2006

The Supreme Court established in Jackson v. … The Court does not find any allegations by Plaintiff of Defendants’ conduct that would qualify as outrageous conduct under this standard.

Kimberly Clark Corp. v. Marzall

94 F. Supp. 254 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 8, 1950

Plaintiff introduced evidence which established a secondary meaning in the trade and which also established substantially exclusive and continuous use of this mark by the applicant in commerce for the five years next preceding … It is also clear that the mark Kimberly Clark has no other characteristic Tiut that of a surname, although its secondary meaning as a source has been clearly established. As was stated in Estate of P. D.

Center for Auto Safety v. Dole

582 F. Supp. 1444 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 27, 1984

safety guidelines or standards which will enable her to determine which “classes of highways” qualify for interim designation under § 411(b). … Such delays are clearly “grounded in the purposes of the Act.” This case would be much different if the FHWA had repeatedly failed to meet time commitments made to the Court. Compare State of Illinois v.

A.B. v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 2, 2010

Although it is somewhat unclear as to whether Plaintiff has met her burden of pleading to establish municipal liability against the District of Columbia under Section 1983, the Court declines to make a ruling on this issue … The portion of Best that Chief Judge Lamberth cites to in DL discusses the Best court’s denial of the defendant-employees’ qualified immunity defense. See id. at 49.

Sun Pharma Advanced Research Company, Ltd. v. Becerra

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 1, 2025

Recall, to qualify for a Section 529 priority review voucher, an applicant must establish that its application is for a drug to treat a rare pediatric disease that “contains no active moiety . . . that has been previously … By cross-referencing the three Hatch–Waxman pathways in Section 529, Congress clearly signaled that any “previous approval” had to have successfully navigated one of the pathways.

Blackman v. District of Columbia

390 F. Supp. 2d 16 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 29, 2005

West Virginia Dep’t of Health and Human Resources, 532 U.S. 598 , 121 S.Ct. 1835 , 149 L.Ed.2d 855 (2001), the Supreme Court concluded that for a party to qualify as a “prevailing party” under fee-shifting statutes, there … The Special Master’s issuance of her Report and Recommendation clearly falls within the scope of her authority under that Order.

Saperstein v. the Palestinian Authority

693 F. Supp. 2d 81 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 15, 2010

Cir. 1990) (“But the reporter’s privilege is a qualified one. If the plaintiff exhausts all reasonable alternative means of identifying the source, the privilege may yield.”); Lee v. Dep’t of Justice, 401 F. … When judged by this calculus, and a heightened regard for the burden to be imposed upon a third party, the motion to compel clearly fails. B.

Empresa Cubana Exportadora De Alimentos Y Productos Varios v. United States Department of Treasury

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 2009

Accordingly, the change in policy was clearly not arbitrary agency action. … Bancec contended that it should be able to collect on the letter of credit as a separate juridical entity but that it should not be subject to a set-off because the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act immunizes an instrumentality

Craig v. Lew

109 F. Supp. 3d 268 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 19, 2015

He must establish more than “the mere existence of a scintilla of evidence.” Id. at 252. … Craig cannot establish but-for causation, because, by Mr.

Ruffin v. New Destination, LLC

800 F. Supp. 2d 262 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 8, 2011

Plaintiffs contend that they are entitled to judgment against Defendants on them FLSA and DCWPCL claims because the undisputed facts clearly show that they were not paid wages owed to them. … The Court is persuaded that Plaintiffs qualified as employees under this “economic reality” test.

Charette v. Walker

996 F. Supp. 43 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 11, 1998

Army regulations clearly state that the “burden of proof rests with the appellant” and that “the appellant must produce evidence that establishes clearly and convincingly” that the “action is warranted to correct material … if not so qualified, should be discharged. 10 U.S.C. § 3846 .

Haight v. O'Bannon

102 F. Supp. 3d 179 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 22, 2015

Haight’s allegations clearly satisfy the first part of the inquiry, as excessive force and false arrest constitute predicate constitutional violations. Graham v. … 823 (noting that municipal liability claims require specific factual connections between police policy and constitutional harms because otherwise virtually any allegation of harm inflicted by a municipal official would qualify

Lewis v. Government of the District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 17, 2009

Circuit law clearly provides one-year or three-year statutes of limitations for § 1983 ... claims.") (citations omitted). … cause of action against a "person" who, while acting pursuant to "any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State ... or the District of Columbia" deprives an individual of "any rights, privileges, or immunities

Comptel v. Federal Communications Commission

910 F. Supp. 2d 100 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 19, 2012

It reiterates that the agency bears the burden to establish confidentiality. Id. (citing Coastal States, 617 F.2d at 863). … “To 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 ‘would compromise a substantial, as opposed

WPOW, Inc. v. MRLJ ENTERPRISES

584 F. Supp. 132 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 15, 1984

Thus, plaintiff clearly has a copyright on the engineering report. … But defendants can hardly be deemed “qualified” on the basis of an application which is a copy of another applicant’s work.

Robinson v. District of Columbia

130 F. Supp. 3d 180 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 15, 2015

Sullivan, to whom this case was previously assigned, dismissed Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment counts and denied Pepperman’s claim of qualified immunity, see Robinson v. District of Columbia, 736 F. … Should Plaintiff fail to provide sufficient proof to establish her claim at trial, the District may certainly move for judgment as a matter of law under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(a).

McKinney v. Caldera

141 F. Supp. 2d 25 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 28, 2001

Under a grant of testimonial immunity, SSG Christina Fetrow testified in an ex parte interview with Lieutenant Colonel Cos-grove, which McKinney was not permitted to attend. … Circuit has held that the Smithsonian, a cultural and research institution dedicated to “the increase and diffusion of knowledge among men,” does not qualify as an agency under the APA.

In Re Navy Chaplaincy

516 F. Supp. 2d 119 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 15, 2007

), the plaintiffs move for a preliminary injunction to prevent the Navy from affording preferential treatment to Catholic chaplains by allowing them to remain on active duty past the statutory separation age in order to qualify … Specifically, the plaintiffs argue that allowing the Catholic chaplains who were allegedly illegally retained to remain on active duty “is a continuing violation of the Establishment Clause because it clearly communicates

Informed Consent Action Network v. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 24, 2025

The request suggested that such records would likely be found in the CDC’s Immunization Safety Office. See id. … To qualify for Exemption 5, “a document must . . . satisfy two conditions.” Dep’t of Inte- rior v. Klamath Water Users Protective Ass’n, 532 U.S. 1, 8 (2001).