Case law

Organization for Competitive Markets v. Office of Inspector General

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 12, 2024

The Court is persuaded that USDA-OIG has established that the withheld documents are pre-decisional because the Vaughn index and declarations clearly establish that the communications and exchanged drafts at issue were … Moreover, the Vaughn index and declarations clearly establish the deliberative, give-and-take nature of the communications and exchanged drafts.

Hayslett v. Perry

332 F. Supp. 2d 93 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 16, 2004

“To establish a prima facie case of discriminatory non-promotion,” plaintiff must show that: “ ‘(1) [s]he is a member of a protected class; (2)[s]he applied for and was qualified for an available position; (3) despite [her … Despite this clearly established precedent, plaintiff fails to point to any negative consequences or objectively tangible harm that resulted from the negative narrative comments on her 2001 evaluation.

State of Maryland v. Mathews

415 F. Supp. 1206 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 14, 1976

this purpose is the overall concept of quality control regulations which would assure that a minimum of erroneous payments will occur and thereby ensure that a satisfactory amount will be available for those who properly qualify … Therefore, defendants’ assertions that this study provides the foundation for the tolerance levels clearly is not supported by the record.

Canady v. Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH

99 F. Supp. 2d 37 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2000

(Col. 5, Lines 21-24) This purpose of “maneuvering” is clearly supported in the specification. … But Erbe has not asserted that either the Office Action or the Amendment related to the probe application qualified for nonpro-duction under this first objection.

United States v. Boutros

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 17, 2019

While the record is unclear as to whether “RedWomen” released funds to Defendant, this too qualifies as a “transaction.” … The Court therefore finds that there was no agreement, but even if there were one, the record clearly and convincingly establishes violations of conditions of release. B.

Tequila Centinela, S.A. De C v. v. Bacardi & Co.

517 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 29, 2007

Bacardi also provided supplemental documentation to the TTAB to establish its ownership of the marks cited in the Opposition. (Id.) … A denial of a motion for summary judgment by the TTAB in this case merely meant that the TTAB found enough facts in dispute as to find that Centinela was not entitled to judgment as a matter of law. 12 This is clearly not

Cousins v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 15, 2014

“It is well established that a police officer has a qualified privilege to use reasonable force to effect an arrest, provided that the means employed are not ‘in excess of those which the actor reasonably believes to be … Defamatory statements made under a qualified privilege are not actionable, however, unless the plaintiff shows that there was excessive publication or express malice. See Jackson, 541 F.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. U. S. Department of Justice

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 21, 2011

It is established that the “usual method of calculating reasonable attorney’s fees is to multiply the hours reasonably expended in the litigation by a reasonable hourly fee, producing the ‘lodestar’ amount.” … Supp. 907, 911 (W.D.N.Y. 1983) (compensation for work performed after records were released “would assess a penalty against defendants which is clearly unwarranted”).

Jones v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 21, 2024

Defendant argues that plaintiff’s bare allegation that she is “a qualified person with a disability” is not enough to establish this element of a failure to accommodate claim, Def.’s Mot. … Yet, plaintiff does allege more than that she is a qualified person with a disability.

Kay v. Federal Communications Commission

867 F. Supp. 11 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 8, 1994

The agency bears the burden of establishing a “ ‘relatively detailed justification’ for assertion of an exemption, and must demonstrate to a reviewing court that records are clearly *17 exempt.” Id. … The Court finds that the FCC’s statutory authority to revoke licenses or deny license applications is a qualifying law enforcement purpose. Cf. Church of Scientology, Int’l v.

Independent Bankers Ass'n of America v. Federal Home Loan Bank Board

557 F. Supp. 23 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 4, 1982

It does so by further defining the scope of the qualifier “general” and clarifying the circumstances under which the Board will permit an exception to its “general” rule. … Congress can limit the broad discretionary authority it has previously clearly granted the Board if it chooses to do so.

Rattigan v. Holder

636 F. Supp. 2d 89 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 20, 2009

“[A] clearance may be granted only when ‘clearly consistent with the interests of the national security.’ ” Id. at 528, 108 S.Ct. 818 (quoting Executive Order and regulations). … Division decided instead that the observations of the Leighton EC were meritorious, the next step would appear to have been the communication of that conclusion to the FBI’s Security Programs Manager, who could have instituted established

BRIDGES PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOL v. Barrie

796 F. Supp. 2d 39 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 11, 2011

Nahass, 699 F.Supp.2d 175, 182 (D.D.C.2010) (“[Wjhere a defendant is seeking to establish ‘prevailing part/ status, that party need not establish a court-ordered change in the legal relationship of the parties.”) … Defendants appear to dispute this fact by saying that "[t]he team gave her part time and nothing in the notes shows clearly that the mom agreed to reduction of services.” Defendants’ Statement of Material Facts ("Defs.’

In re Robins' Estate

38 F. Supp. 468 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 28, 1941

Clearly, the testator intended the two terms to be read together, and yet I believe that, because of the choice of different terms, the testator intended, by the use of the word “issue” instead of “children” in the residual … While, doubtless, if the term “issue” had been qualified by the phrase “per stirpes,” the question now under consideration would riot have been raised, it is quite understandable why the testator, who is said to have been

Perry Capital LLC v. Lew

70 F. Supp. 3d 208 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2014

HERA established FHFA as an independent agency to supervise and regulate the GSEs. 12 U.S.C. § 4511. … No. 102-550, §§ 1301-1395, 106 Stat. 3672, 3941-4012 (establishing OFHEO); 12 U.S.C. § 4617(b)(2)(i).

Hinson Ex Rel. N.H. v. Merritt Educational Center

521 F. Supp. 2d 22 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 13, 2007

Plaintiffs clearly allege that Defendants denied N.H. FAPE by failing to perform required evaluations, failing to develop appropriate IEPs, and failing to issue a notice of placement to an appropriate setting. … Plaintiffs are correct that these implementing regulations establish requirements relating to disciplinary procedures for students with known or suspected disabilities.

In Re: Application to Issue a Subpoena for the Taking of a Deposition and the Production of Documents for Use in a Foreign Proceeding

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 3, 2010

LEGAL STANDARD Even if discovery is permissible under 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a),5 an applicant may not seek information that is immune from discovery. … The work product privilege is qualified, not absolute. Elkins, 250 F.R.D. at 26. As with the attorney-client privilege, voluntary disclosure may waive its protections.

Black v. United States

389 F. Supp. 529 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 10, 1975

As such this action is not barred by sovereign immunity since the United States has consented to suit through the Federal Torts Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2671 et seq. … These figures have been established in prior litigation between Black and IRS.

Bigelow v. District of Columbia

122 F.R.D. 111 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 19, 1988

Discussion The Deliberative Process Privilege The deliberative process privilege is not absolute, but rather a qualified one. … These materials clearly fall within the letter and spirit of the deliberative process privilege.

Frank LLP v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 5, 2020

This court therefore joins Frank II in finding that CFPB’s interview techniques qualify as protected techniques and procedures under Exemption 7(E). 2. … An agency must only show “a chance of a reasonably expected risk” to qualify for the exemption. Mayer Brown LLP v. IRS, 562 F.3d 1190, 1193 (D.C. Cir. 2009); Jett, 139 F. Supp. 3d at 362.