Case law

U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission v. Levine

671 F. Supp. 2d 14 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 24, 2009

Levine, on the other hand, answered very clearly that her husband sold the ring. … June 15, 2001) ("Although the same location and business purpose do not, by themselves, establish *34 that [an entity] is an alter ego, they clearly provide support for that conclusion.”).

United States v. Adonis

744 F. Supp. 336 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 2, 1990

Mol-dauer determined that Adonis was mentally retarded, as defined in the standards established by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual III as revised. Dr. … The July 10 date had been established and recorded in two prior orders of the Court. 15 .

Al-Aulaqi v. Panetta

35 F. Supp. 3d 56 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 4, 2014

Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 389 (1971); and (3) Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. See Mot. to Dismiss [Dkt. 18]; Reply [Dkt. 23]. Plaintiffs oppose. … Indeed, Bivens permits a damages action against a federal officer for a violation of a plaintiff’s clearly-established constitutional rights. 26 See Corr. Servs. Corp. v.

Arnold v. Islamic Republic of Iran

787 F. Supp. 2d 37 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 31, 2011

The Court consolidated this suit — which was brought pursuant to the former “state-sponsored terrorism” exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), codified at 28 U.S.C. § 1605 (a)(7), and then re-filed under … Republic of Iraq, 529 F.3d 1187, 1191 (D.C.Cir.2008) (“[A] statute applies to a pending case only if the Congress clearly so provides.”), reversed on other grounds by Republic of Iraq v.

In DEFENSE OF ANIMALS v. Salazar

675 F. Supp. 2d 89 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 23, 2009

The plaintiffs protest that the Wild Horse Act clearly does not permit such long-term holding of horses by BLM, and the Court finds that argument persuasive. … United States Bureau of Land Management, 460 F.3d 13 , 19 n. 7 (D.C.Cir.2006) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted), it may do so only by clearly identifying the action to be ratified.

Young v. Burton

567 F. Supp. 2d 121 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 22, 2008

Testimony as to the nature, cause, and extent of plaintiffs’ symptoms is clearly relevant to the final determination of liability and damages. … Shoemaker’s theory of mold illness is based on the belief that patients have innate immune responses to mold, rather than acquired immune responses (ie., allergies), and as such, his methodology necessarily deviates from

College Sports Council v. Government Accountability Office

421 F. Supp. 2d 59 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 15, 2006

The instant case is clearly controlled by Hodel. Section 805 is indisputably a congressional reporting statute. Pub.L. No. 105-244 § 805 , 112 Stat. 1807 . … Additionally, the plaintiff has filed two notices of supplemental authority for its arguments regarding standing and sovereign immunity.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. R&R Janitorial Painting and Building Services, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 20, 2025

The EEOC also argues that the reasons R&R has provided for its RIF decision-making are pretextual as evidenced by its contention that more senior and qualified Hispanic workers were let go in favor of less qualified, non-Hispanic … However, courts have consistently emphasized that not all discriminatory comments qualify as direct evidence.

Travis v. Bowen

633 F. Supp. 264 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 13, 1986

To qualify for disability insurance benefits, one must be “under a disability” as defined by the Social Security Act. 42 U.S.C. § 423 (a)(1)(D). … Because one form clearly represents medical opinion and the other probably does, they are entitled to weight in the evaluation of whether the ALJ’s decision is supported by substantial evidence.

United States v. E-Gold, Ltd.

550 F. Supp. 2d 82 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 8, 2008

[I]n order to qualify as a “money transmitting business,” a business must engage in cash transactions. … The conference report clearly states that the purpose of Section 5330 is to establish a registration requirement for businesses that engage in, inter alia, money transmitting services. Id.

Burner v. Washington

399 F. Supp. 44 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 15, 1975

It is extremely difficult, then, for the Court to discern the sort of actual personal injury or harm which Warth so clearly says is necessary. … But the price of this immunity, I insist, is that they should not have the last word in those basic conflicts of “right and ■ wrong — between whose endless jar justice resides.”

National Council for Adoption v. Pompeo

District Court, District of Columbia · May 19, 2020

Defendants’ position very clearly comports with the SRG’s text. 2. … But as the Court has already established, that is a mischaracterization of the SRG.

Atari Games Corp. v. Oman

693 F. Supp. 1204 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 25, 1988

Numerous courts have recognized that video games, as audiovisual works, qualify for copyright protection. E.g., Atari, Inc. v. … In each case the chosen expression was clearly distinct and separable from the idea of the game itself.

Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. U.S. Postal Service

134 F. Supp. 3d 365 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2015

The Postal Service’s decision on a mailing rate classification should be overturned only when “clearly wrong.” Id. … By statute, the Postal Regulatory Commission is required to establish a nationwide system for establishing and regulating a schedule of postal rates and *382 classes. Id. § 3622(a).

Thomas v. District of Columbia

227 F. Supp. 3d 88 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 30, 2016

According to Thomas Youngblood told Thomas that she was not being fired for cause and that, as a result, she would still qualify to receive severance pay. Dkt. 33-9 at 135-36. … At this 33 stage, permitting evidence of temporal proximity to rebut the defendant’s showing would be tantamount to “grant[ing] employees a period of immunity, during which no act, however egregious would support summary

Wolfson v. United States of America

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 30, 2009

for Electronic Interceptions JUSTICE/CRM-021 The Stocks and Bonds Intelligence Control Card File System JUSTICE/CRM-022 Witness Immunity … Since Title III clearly identifies intercepted communications as the subject of its disclosure limitations[,] it falls squarely within the scope of subsection (B)’s second prong

Dehshiri v. Blinken

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 7, 2025

Circuit has not clearly answered this question. See Verizon v. FCC, 770 F.3d 961, 968 n.11 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (noting the tension between D.C. Cir. … Such matters are so exclusively entrusted to the political branches of government as to be largely immune from judicial inquiry or interference.”).

Bridgeforth v. Salazar

831 F. Supp. 2d 132 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 20, 2011

Plaintiff claims that during this time, he qualified to take the written test for promotion to Sergeant but was not allowed to take the examination due to his unfit-for-duty evaluation. Compl. at ¶ 39. … But plaintiff’s protected EEO activity cannot immunize him “from those petty slights or minor annoyances that often take place at work and that all employees experience.” Burlington Northern, 548 U.S. at 68 (2006).

New Life Evangelistic Center, Inc. v. Sebelius

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 1, 2010

property in Cape Girardeau, Missouri for establishing a homeless assistance program. … Read in its proper context, the first sentence clearly requires that the property be “placed into [its proposed] use” within the twelve-month period. Id.

National Railroad Passenger Corporation v. Veolia Transportation Services Inc

District Court, District of Columbia · May 9, 2011

Veolia argues that even if it had not engaged in the conduct challenged by Amtrak, it still would have been able to submit “a qualifying bid.” Defs.’ Reply at 21-23. … First, Veolia points out that it had qualified alternative candidates for all of its Key Management Team positions. Id. at 22-23; Defs.’ Mem. at 40-41.