Case law

Murphy v. Meink

District Court, District of Columbia · May 29, 2026

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (cleaned up). … Brown v. Whole Foods Mkt. Grp., Inc., 789 F.3d 146, 152 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (cleaned up). But even a pro se party must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Wonders v. Dep’t of the Army Off. of Gen.

United States v. Michel

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 30, 2024

Hemphill v. New York, 595 U.S. 140, 152 (2022); see also United States v. Brown, 921 F.2d 1304, 1307 (D.C. … See United States v. Brown, 508 F.3d 1066, 1076 (D.C. Cir. 2007).

Mercadante v. Xe Services, LLC

864 F. Supp. 2d 54 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 22, 2012

See, e.g., Awuah v. Coverall N. Am., Inc., 554 F.3d 7, 11-12 (1st Cir. 2009); Agere Sys., Inc. v. Samsung Elec. Ltd., 560 F.3d 337, 339-40 (5th Cir. 2009); Fallo v. … Furthermore, because “the appropriate standard of review [in this context] is the same standard used in resolving summary judgment motions,” Brown v. Dorsey & Whitney, LLP, 267 F.

Alliance of Artists & Recording Companies v. General Motors Co.

162 F. Supp. 3d 8 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 19, 2016

Hall v. … Hosps., Inc. v.

Oyola v. Midland Funding, LLC

295 F. Supp. 3d 14 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 27, 2018

(citing Buckeye Check Cashing v. … IOM Corp. v. Brown Forman Corp. , 627 F.3d 440 , 450 (1st Cir. 2010) (citing Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc. , 723 F.2d 155 , 159 (1st Cir. 1983) ).

Harris v. Wilson

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 11, 2017

OHJDOFRQFOXVLRQVBrowning v. … OHJDOFRQFOXVLRQVSee Kowal)GDW see also Browning )GDW  ,Q UXOLQJ XSRQ D PRWLRQ WR GLVPLVV IRU IDLOXUH WR VWDWH D FODLP D FRXUW PD\ RUGLQDULO\ FRQVLGHURQO\³WKH

Guevara v. Spartan Enterprises, LLC

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 23, 2020

See, e.g., Lockhart v. … See Spartan Opp. at 7–10; Brown Decl., ¶¶ 6–7, 10, 13, 16–20. Presumably, Bozzuto arrived at this 80/20 split because 36 public-housing units out of 179 total units represents 20.11% of the units in the complex.

Leighton v. Central Intelligence Agency

412 F. Supp. 2d 30 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 18, 2006

Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C.Cir.2002) (internal citations and quotations omitted). … Similarly, in Reinbold v.

Ramos v. Unknown Special Agent

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 10, 2023

Cir. 2010) (courts “may raise the res judicata preclusion defense sua sponte”) (citing Brown v. Dist. of Columbia, 514 F.3d 1279, 1285–86 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (other citation omitted)); see also Fenwick v. … Wilson v. Fullwood, 772 F. Supp. 2d 246, 261 (D.D.C. 2011) (collecting cases); see Sunshine Anthracite Coal v.

McVeigh v. Cohen

983 F. Supp. 215 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 26, 1998

This evidence was rejected by the Board. … . —, 117 S.Ct. 358 , 136 L.Ed.2d 250 (1996); Richenberg v. Perry, 97 F.3d 256 (8th Cir.1996), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 45 , 139 L.Ed.2d 12 (1997); Able v.

Tierney v. Tierney

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 30, 2022

In 2017, Plaintiffs brought a derivative action in West Virginia state court against certain Board members. Id. ¶ 4. … The Board convened the next day and voted to seek dismissal of Plaintiffs’ claims. Id. ¶ 50.

Weinig v. Coe

54 F. Supp. 1009 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 22, 1943

Claims to the generic group of reagents in the Harris application C were rejected by the Board of Appeals, after the termination of the interference. “11. … I think this case is controlled by the cases of International Cellucotton Products Co. v. Coe, 66 App.D.C. 248 , 35 F.2d 869 , and American Cyanamid Co. v.

De Deaux v. Saul

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 25, 2022

Pinkney v. Astrue, 675 F. Supp. 2d 9, 14 (D.D.C. 2009) (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)). The ALJ is “entitled to weigh conflicting opinions and to make his own assessment of their credibility,” Brown v. … Brown v. Barnhart, 370 F. Supp. 2d 286, 288 (D.D.C. 2005) (internal quotation marks omitted).

Zelaya v. UNICCO Service Co.

733 F. Supp. 2d 121 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 20, 2010

Id. at 816 (quoting Brown v. Brody, 199 F.3d 446, 458-59 (D.C.Cir.1999)). … The Court agrees with defendants’ interpretation of Brown v.

Davis v. United States Sentencing Commission

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 21, 2011

Tooley v. Napolitano, 586 F.3d 1006, 1010 (D.C. Cir. 2009); see Caldwell v. Kagan, 777 F. … Rooney v. Sec'y of Army, 405 F.3d 1029, 1031 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (citing LoBue v. Christopher, 82 F.3d 1081, 1082 (D.C. Cir. 1996»; see Taylor v. United States Board of Parole, 194 F.2d 882, 883 (D.C.

Patterson v. Johnson

391 F. Supp. 2d 140 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 26, 2005

Brown v. Brody, 199 F.3d 446, 452 (D.C.Cir.1999). If he succeeds, the burden shifts to defendant to articulate some legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its actions. Id. … Brown v. Marsh, 777 F.2d 8, 14 (D.C.Cir.1985). The deadlines allow an employer to investigate promptly before evidence becomes stale. See Del. State Coll. v.

Christopher v. Mitchell

318 F. Supp. 994 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 2, 1970

Katzenbach v. … Northampton County Board of Elections, 360 U.S. 45 , 79 S.Ct. 985 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1072 (1959), such requirements have been put in a precarious position by the Court’s opinion in Gaston County, N. C. v.

Flythe v. District of Columbia

994 F. Supp. 2d 50 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 8, 2013

See United States v. Brown, 448 F.3d 239, 246 (3d Cir. 2006); United States v. Coggins, 986 F.2d 651, 654 (3d Cir. 1993); United States v. Morgan, 936 F.2d 1561, 1567 (10th Cir. 1991). … Godfrey v. Iverson, 559 F.3d 569, 571 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (quoting Brown v. Argenbright Sec., Inc., 782 A.2d 752, 760 (D.C. 2001)).

Monaco v. Hoffman

189 F. Supp. 474 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 8, 1960

Gayler v. Wilder, 10 How. 477, 495-498 , 13 L.Ed. 504 ; Acme Flexible Clasp Co. v. Cary Mfg. Co., C.C., 96 F. 344 , affirmed 2 Cir., 101 F. 269 . 2 . … . & Terminal Co. v. Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co., 6 Cir., 186 F. 166, 168 . 3 . Craftint Mfg. Co. v. Baker, 9 Cir., 94 F.2d 369, 372 ; Alexander Milburn Co. v.

Deschamps v. District of Columbia

582 F. Supp. 2d 14 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 23, 2008

Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 , 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1964 , 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007), so that they can prepare a responsive answer and an adequate defense, Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C.1977). … See Maniaci v.