Case law

Webster v. United States Department of Justice

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2020

To qualify under any of the categories, the information at issue must first meet a threshold requirement: that it was “compiled for law enforcement purposes.” Id. … Cir. 1984) (finding that “confidential information supplied by foreign and local law enforcement agencies is clearly within the purview of Exemption 7(D)”). c.

Landmark Legal Foundation v. Environmental Protection Agency

910 F. Supp. 2d 270 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 21, 2012

The circuits split on whether courts should balance the four preliminary injunction factors on a sliding scale, as they have traditionally done, or whether each factor must now be established independently. The D.C. … Furthering of Public Interest The public interest clearly favors agency processing of FOIA requests as quickly as possible.

Simpson v. Leavitt

557 F. Supp. 2d 118 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 3, 2008

Head Start has “hired a lot of people who are not young because they are the best qualified from the outside because they are the best qualified for the job.” See id. at 78. II. … Bryans was the most qualified among the qualified applicants. Accordingly, the Court will enter judgment for defendant. An appropriate Order will be issued this same day. 1 . Mr.

United States v. Eisenberg

149 F. Supp. 3d 71 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 15, 2015

DOL-SOL also rejected Eisenberg’s offer of monthly payments because it would “clearly result in payment being completed well beyond one year.” Id. … Eisenberg was clearly apprised of his rights and responsibilities with respect to the United States’ right of recovery of FECA claims. See also Heckler v. Cmty.

Yaghobi v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 1, 2025

Whether a motion to dismiss is facial or factual, the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that the court has subject-matter jurisdiction. See Lujan v. Defs. … Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”), 21 U.S.C. § 301 et seq., was “committed to agency 7 discretion by law,” 5 U.S.C. § 701(a)(2), and thus beyond the waiver of sovereign immunity

Scotts Valley Band of Pomo Indians v. Burgum

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 30, 2025

That provision immunizes gaming on “lands . . . taken into trust as part of . . . the restoration of lands for an Indian tribe that is restored to Federal recognition.” 25 U.S.C. § 2719(b)(1)(B)(iii). … In its January letter, Interior declared that the Vallejo parcel “qualifie[d] as restored lands.” A.R. at SV-2.

Truong v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 28, 2023

Security’s (“DHS”) rule change in 2019 amending the regulations governing the EB-5 program and raising the investment thresholds for applicants, applicants seeking lawful permanent residence through the EB-5 program qualified … The RFE also noted that “USCIS must be able to determine the lawful source of the claimed investment funds and the evidence must clearly document the flow of the investment funds from their initial origin until they are

United States v. Sum of $70,990,605

4 F. Supp. 3d 209 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 18, 2014

Thus, where, as here, “a criminal investigation and a civil forfeiture action have common facts, similar alleged violations and some common parties, the actions are clearly related.” United States v. … Supp. 2d 23, 33 (D.D.C. 2001) (“Criminal defendants are only entitled to statements of non- testifying witnesses or co-conspirators if those statements qualify as Brady material.”).

Coulibaly v. Tillerson

273 F. Supp. 3d 16 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 29, 2017

Both titles require qualified employees to have worked for their employers for at least one year. … Supp. 3d at 149, 151 n.12 (holding that a Title II claim “would be barred by sovereign immunity” and that “Title II does not create an implied right of action”).

Russ v. Van Scoyoc Associates, Inc.

122 F. Supp. 2d 29 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 16, 2000

The events in December 1997 are insufficiently related to the events in January 1998 to qualify as a continuing violation. … Establishing that the employee was constructively discharged is one way of establishing an element of a discrimination claim, that the plaintiff suffered an adverse employment action.

Avocados Plus Inc. v. Johanns

421 F. Supp. 2d 45 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 15, 2006

by qualified state beef councils. … Livestock Marketing clearly establishes that when private entities are enlisted to propagate generic advertising that is governed by specific statutory constraints and overseen by the Secretary, their expressive activity

Levesque v. Schroder Inv. Mgmt. N. Am., Inc.

368 F. Supp. 3d 302 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 27, 2019

Under the 2013 Plan, employees qualified for two kinds of incentive-based compensation schemes: quantitative and qualitative. … While neither party raises this material fact, the 2013 Plan clearly states that "[t]he Plan shall be governed by New York law".

White v. Hilton Hotels Retirement Plan

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 17, 2019

promote finality, predictability and economy of judicial resources, as a rule a court should be loathe to revisit its own prior decisions in the absence of extraordinary circumstances such as where the initial decision was clearly … In their Motion, Plaintiffs identify several distinct issues from Kifafi that they contend qualify for issue preclusion in this case. See id. at 3–7.

United States v. Marchado-Erazo

950 F. Supp. 2d 49 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 17, 2013

Magnuson’s qualifications, which the Court finds are robust and establish him as well educated, well practiced, and well trained in the proffered area of expertise. See United States v. … It argues that the expert report submitted in this case establishes itself as based on sufficient data and as the product of a reliable methodology. Id. at 9. Mr.

United States v. Trucking Employers, Inc.

75 F.R.D. 682 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 31, 1977

Generally speaking, the named parties must be represented by qualified counsel, see, e. g., Technograph Printed Circuits, Ltd. v. … Section (b)(3), which clearly applies to defendant class actions, is subject to the opt-out provision in Rule 23(c)(2).

Lans v. Adduci Mastriani & Schaumberg L.L.P.

786 F. Supp. 2d 240 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 23, 2011

Lans did not qualify as newly discovered evidence within the meaning of Rule 60(b)(2)), which Dr. Lans, through AMS, appealed. … While negotiating or performing business contracts has qualified as ‘transacting business’ for purposes of § 13-423(a)(1), entering into a contract with an out-of-state party does not by itself ... establish minimum contacts

Blackman v. District of Columbia

328 F. Supp. 2d 46 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 5, 2004

The Court concludes that this Order altered the legal relationship of the parties, by ordering the defendants to take certain steps on behalf of plaintiff or face sanctions, and clearly satisfies the “judicial imprimatur” … If this amount is not paid within 30 days, it will bear interest at the rate established by 28 U.S.C. § 1961 from the 31st calendar day following entry of this Order. . SO ORDERED. 1 .

Eastern Savings Bank, Fsb v. Papageorge

31 F. Supp. 3d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 10, 2014

To establish a violation of § 1962(c)’s prohibition on racketeering activity, the plaintiff must establish “‘(1) conduct (2) of an enterprise (3) through a pattern (4) of racketeering activity.’” W. Assoc. Ltd. … The plaintiff does not, however, set out clearly in its RICO claim the specific factual allegations which constitute each of the criminal predicate acts, thereby complicating evaluation of these RICO claim prerequisites

United States v. Baker

266 F. Supp. 461 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 20, 1967

It is well established that one challenging the constitution of a jury panel has the burden of demonstrating that some recognized class has been improperly excluded and that such exclusion was the result of the deliberate … The defendant has failed to demonstrate that a specific class or group was systematically excluded by the Jury Commissioners or that there has been any exclusion at all of persons qualified to act as jurors.

Galliano v. United States Postal Service

669 F. Supp. 488 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 21, 1986

First, the representation that Gramm authorized plaintiffs to solicit and collect funds for Gramm's senatorial candidacy is clearly false, as shown by Gramm's affidavit. … Many sins and injustices have received constitutional protection and immunity from attack by virtue of the mantle of the First Amendment. This is not an example of such a situation.