Case law

Washington Research Project, Inc. v. Department of Health, Education & Welfare

366 F. Supp. 929 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 6, 1973

Each branch or center of the NIMH is served by one or more review groups qualified in a specific field. … Portions of the “pink sheets” and the site visit reports could fall within the terms of this exemption, but the Government has the burden of establishing that disclosure in each instance would be “clearly unwarranted.”

Information Resources, Inc. v. United States

676 F. Supp. 293 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 3, 1987

Section 13 of that statute called for the Secretary of Agriculture (the Secretary) to establish an advisory panel (the panel) to study the cost-effectiveness of fuel ethanol production. … Thus, the statutory allowance of one working day between the filing of a protest and the triggering of the automatic suspension provisions allows the GAO a brief opportunity to screen protests and filter out the clearly merit-less

New York State Bar Ass'n v. Federal Trade Commission

276 F. Supp. 2d 110 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 11, 2003

Dictionary 1171 (1993) (“an established society or corporation: an establishment or foundation especially] of a public character”). … This is clearly not the case with the GLBA.

Mianegaz v. Hyatt Corp.

319 F. Supp. 2d 13 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 24, 2004

To establish a prima facie case of age discrimination, the plaintiff must show that: (1) he is a member of the ADEA’s protected class of persons over forty years of age; (2) he was qualified for his position and was performing … Rather, “[t]he defendant must clearly set forth, through the introduction of admissible evidence, reasons for its actions which, if believed by the trier of fact, would support a finding that unlawful discrimination was not

American Bankers Association v. National Credit Union Administration

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 29, 2018

The rule established three requirements for community credit union applications: (1) the proposed area must have clearly defined geographic boundaries; (2) the applicant must demonstrate that the proposed area falls within … First, the rule established that any Single Political Jurisdiction (or any contiguous portion of one) automatically qualified as a local community. Id. at 18,357.

Amirentezam v. Islamic Republic of Iran

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 5, 2023

Supp. 3d 158, 165 (D.D.C. 2020) (qualifying Professor Gabbay “as an expert in the current conditions in Iran, the treatment of prisoners in Iran, and the regime’s use of torture”). 8 In reaching his opinions, Professor … Plaintiffs contend that sovereign immunity should be waived because Amir-Entezam was tortured and taken hostage by Iran. See ECF No. 26 at 10–23.

Bridges Public Charter School v. Barrie

District Court, District of Columbia · May 6, 2010

Once a child is found to qualify for a free appropriate public education, the school 1 Christopher Anwah and the Law Offices of Christopher Anwah, PLLC, have answered Bridges's complaint. … is whether Bridges has alleged facts that, taken as true, demonstrate that the due process complaint was "frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation," or that defendants continued to litigate "after the litigation clearly

Hansen v. Billington

644 F. Supp. 2d 97 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 5, 2009

Yet, a nonmoving party must establish more than a “mere ... scintilla of evidence” in support of its position. Id. at 252 . … It did not allege retaliation for prior EEO activity, presumably because there had been no prior activity; the charge quite clearly claims race and age discrimination.

Klayman v. Porter

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 16, 2025

Cir. 2024); (2) affirmed this Court’s “dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims for damages on immunity grounds,” id.; (3) “reverse[d] in part [this Court’s] dismissal of … In opposition, the plaintiff argued that “[t]he problem with [the defendants’] argument is clearly evident: [the plaintiff] has not been allowed any discovery on this matter,” Pl.’s Opp’n at 9, and because the defendants

Waters v. Armenian Genocide Museum & Memorial, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 22, 2010

Defendants argue that the record clearly will show that it was Plaintiffs, not Defendants, who failed to respond to the D.C. government’s inquiries regarding a tax exemption, and this is the reason that there was no tax … To the extent that Plaintiffs failed to disclose this theory of damages during discovery, that failure is harmless because Defendants were clearly aware of Ms.

Gregory v. Kijakazi

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 12, 2022

Statutory and Regulatory Background “To qualify for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income under Titles II and XVI of the [Social Security] Act, [a claimant] must establish that []he is ‘disabled … The ALJ clearly did not discount Gregory’s testimony about the severity of his symptoms based on lack of objective evidence alone. He cited other evidence in the record, including Gregory’s own account.

Dammarell v. Islamic Republic of Iran

370 F. Supp. 2d 218 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 12, 2005

Thus, Cicippio-Puleo clearly required plaintiffs in an FSIA case to describe their .causes of action with particularity in a complaint. … Nor do they offer any serious response to this well-established law.

Cayman Turtle Farm, Ltd. v. Andrus

478 F. Supp. 125 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 29, 1979

The specimens on the Cayman Turtle Farm cannot qualify for this exemption because they were held in the course of a commercial activity. … Moreover, all turtles and the progeny of all turtles acquired after December 28,1973, would also not qualify for this exemption.

Dbw Partners, LLC v. United States Postal Service

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 28, 2019

Additionally, it has not been established that this event was “isolated.” … The government did not meet its burden and has not established that Exemption 6 justified a categorical Glomar response.

Stoe v. Lynch

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 28, 2018

True, she was in some ways more qualified on paper than was Greene to hold the position she was denied. But both were plainly well qualified. … However, Greene made the certification list of the “best qualified” applicants, Def.’s SMF ¶¶ 35–36; Def.’s Ex. 24 [ECF No. 16-28] at 3, which establishes that he was qualified for 10 Stoe also claims

Aero Corp. v. Department of the Navy

540 F. Supp. 180 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 26, 1982

The limits on the district court’s competence were clearly stated by the Steinthal court. … That conclusion was compelled by the weight of GAO precedent and the fact that, by defendant’s own view of the facts, LGC was the best qualified firm for SLEP but was not the only firm so qualified.

Hyman v. First Union Corp.

982 F. Supp. 8 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 27, 1997

Finally, plaintiffs allege that First Union did not give them any priority consideration for open positions, but that First Union repeatedly sought to fill vacancies with external hires in disregard of the availability of qualified … Thus, the court concludes that plaintiffs have failed to rebut the presumption of at-will employment in order to establish that an employment contract was created.

Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe v. Sebelius

70 F. Supp. 3d 534 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 7, 2014

She reasons further that because the other tribes are protected by sovereign immunity, they cannot be joined and the case therefore must be dismissed. … Standard of Review Under the ISDEAA Under the ISDEAA, the Secretary has “the burden of proof to establish by clearly demonstrating the validity of the grounds for declining [a] contract proposal.” 25 U.S.C. § 450f

Murray v. Shaw

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 26, 2025

An MSPB proceeding easily qualifies under that standard. … As for Williamson, Murray does not clearly allege what actions by her constituted tortious interference.

Segar v. Ashcroft

422 F. Supp. 2d 117 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 9, 2006

Instead, defendants maintain that the evidence deduced at trial clearly established not only that defendants did not mislead plaintiffs or have reason to suspect that plaintiffs misunderstood the footnote, but that the evidence … best qualified list.