Case law

Otay Mesa Property L.P. v. U.S. Department of the Interior

714 F. Supp. 2d 73 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 27, 2010

Plaintiffs argue that although parts of subunit 5D clearly contain vernal pools and other primary constituent elements, there is no evidence that these elements actually are present on the 143 acres they own. … Plaintiffs do not respond to this argument and the Complaint does not clearly complain of the critical habitat designation of land other than their own 143 acres. The Court takes the matter as conceded. 5 . ...

City of Dover, New Hampshire v. United States Environmental Protection Agency

956 F. Supp. 2d 272 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 30, 2013

2010, DES initiated a technical peer review of the 2009 Document’s proposals and received a technical assessment from EPA’s Nutrient Scientific Technical Exchange Partnership and Support, which found the numeric criteria clearly … quality standards was not triggered by the publication of the Document.1 Plaintiffs resist this conclusion, relying on an Eleventh Circuit case holding that a Florida regulation entitled “Impaired Waters Rule” would qualify

Chowdhury v. Bair

604 F. Supp. 2d 90 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 2009

In 1998 the plaintiff filed an Equal Employment Opportunity (“EEO”) complaint alleging that FDIC official Mark Brenneman unlawfully failed to promote the plaintiff in favor of lesser qualified candidates based on the plaintiffs … Because the plaintiff does not clearly break down the facts by legal theory, e.g., discrimination, retaliation and hostile work environment, see generally Compl.; Pl.’s Opp'n, the court attempts in the first instance to decipher

New Orleans Workers' Center for Racial Justice v. United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 4, 2019

consistent with customary practice and established procedure, a search was initiated of the . . . [agency’s] Central Records’”). … Cir. 2011)), because, “while Exemption 6 requires a ‘clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy’ to qualify for withholding, Exemption 7(C) requires only that disclosure ‘could reasonably be expected to constitute

Linda Sims v. Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 20, 2020

Adverse Employment Actions Although the Court need not determine whether Plaintiff made out a prima facie case of racial discrimination, see Brady, 520 F.3d at 493, when an employer’s action does not clearly qualify … Here, the parties do not dispute that Plaintiff had a disability or that she was qualified for her position with or without reasonable accommodation.

Long v. United States Department of Health and Human Services

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 15, 2019

. § 11136(2) (requiring HHS to establish “procedures in the case of disputed accuracy of the information”). … An investigation into whether a physician is “qualified to perform the essential functions of his job,” Pl.’s Reply at 22, is clearly an investigation into his professional 4 Plaintiff also notes that HHS did not specifically

McGrath v. Clinton

674 F. Supp. 2d 131 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 25, 2011

To establish a prima facie case in the retaliation context, the plaintiff must establish that “(1) [he engaged in] protected activity; (2) the employer’s action ha[d] an adverse impact on [him]; and (3) a causal relationship … Concerning the other elements of the plaintiffs prima facie case, his negative evaluation reports and his subsequent involuntary curtailment clearly qualify as adverse actions, see note 12, supra, and the plaintiff alleges

Swann v. Office of the Architect of the Capitol

185 F. Supp. 3d 136 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 10, 2016

There is no dispute that “[a] statute can establish a property right by qualifying the terms of employment by, for instance, mandating that an employee cannot be discharged without cause.” Id. … The record clearly reflects that Ayers provided Swann with advance notice of her termination and gave her an opportunity to address the basis for the termination before it took effect. See Def.’s Mot. Summ. J.

Citizens Association of Georgetown v. Washington

370 F. Supp. 1101 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 2, 1974

Private Defendant Georgetown-Inland Corporation (Inland) consists of five affiliates of Inland Steel Corporation which are corporations qualified to do business in the District of Columbia. … Quite clearly, then,- Defendants’ developments cannot be held to those primary ambient air standards today! See Citizens for Clean Air v. Corps of Engineers, 356 F.Supp. 14 (S.D.N.Y.1973).

United States v. Safavian

451 F. Supp. 2d 232 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 12, 2006

Clearly, no prior warning is required under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 . … The defendant further asserts that the verdict form was improper in that the false statements and acts of concealment alleged in Counts Two and Three each should have been qualified by the statement appearing at the end of

United States v. Davis

664 F. Supp. 2d 86 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 16, 2009

Hammock do not qualify as compromise negotiations. … But the advisory committee’s note following the 2006 amendments to the Federal Rules clearly indicate that Rule 408 is intended to apply to criminal as well as civil litigation.

Luna Gutierrez v. Noem

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 5, 2025

Cir. 2016) (“In assessing whether a particular agency action qualifies as final for purposes of judicial review, [the D.C. … It seems that the Plaintiffs have combined Section 706(2)(A)’s phrase “not in accordance with law” with Section 706(2)(B)’s phrase “contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity.”

Damarcus S. Ex Rel. K.S. v. District of Columbia

190 F. Supp. 3d 35 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 23, 2016

(See, e.g., AR at 513 3 Technically, plaintiffs did not seek to have their educational witnesses qualified as experts, but the Hearing Officer determined that they would have been qualified had plaintiffs so requested … , and that they offered opinion testimony as if they were qualified experts.

Tsehaye v. William C. Smith & Co., Inc.

402 F. Supp. 2d 185 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 26, 2005

Channell also gave Tsehaye a formal letter to this effect, which clearly expressed Channell’s views that 2701 did not need two full-time employees and that Tsehaye’s position would likely be the one reduced to a part-time … Termination from employment certainly qualifies as an adverse employment action, see Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742, 761 , 118 S.Ct. 2257 , 141 L.Ed.2d 633 (1998), and there is no debate that, as an African of Ethiopian nationality

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. General Services Administration

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 5, 2019

“To establish that a document is covered by the [deliberative-process] privilege, the government must show that it is both ‘predecisional’ and ‘deliberative.’” Protect Democracy Project, Inc. v. U.S. … As such, it cannot be considered predecisional and thus cannot qualify for the deliberative-process privilege. 1 As CREW points out, moreover, the declarant “has not explained what specific procurement

Healey v. Labgold

231 F. Supp. 2d 64 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 17, 2002

ANALYSIS This case is clearly inapposite; we are certainly not talking about “negligence.” … Surely, the filing of a lawsuit that contains five counts that another federal court has expressly stated you have no right to press qualifies as the multiplying of proceedings.

Robertson v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 16, 2025

District must do more than provide the bare minimum of transportation services, there is no basis for concluding that Pierre-Noel means that such obligation is limitless in scope or extends to services beyond those that are clearly … This is not necessarily dispositive in precluding the organization from qualifying for associational standing. See AARP v. United States Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm’n., 226 F.

Business Equipment Center, Ltd. v. DeJur-Amsco Corp.

465 F. Supp. 775 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 21, 1978

Immediately thereafter, however, he qualifies that claim by stating that some of the content is based on information and belief. … Merely because DeJur established new dealers, however, does not alone permit the inference that they conspired against BEC.

Harbour v. University Club of Washington

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 27, 2022

And based on the facts alleged, both claims clearly seek to impose liability for injuries that “would not have happened but for” Harbour’s employment at the Club. Georgetown Univ., 830 A.2d at 872. … Under that definition, the sick leave Harbour says she is owed, at least as pled in the amended complaint, qualifies as “wages.”

Baloch v. Norton

517 F. Supp. 2d 345 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 25, 2007

The plaintiff continued making EEOC complaints between August and November 2003, clearly undeterred by Lo-man’s measures taken in March, April and October that same year. … Moreover, the fourth amended complaint does not clearly indicate that the instances of retaliation should be considered collectively as well as individually. See, e.g., Am.