Case law

Community Financial Services Association of America, Ltd. v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

132 F. Supp. 3d 98 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 25, 2015

These letters do suggest that some banks would likely consider re-establishing relationships. … Such characterizations are clearly unsupported by the facts on which Plaintiffs rely.

Breiterman v. U.S. Capitol Police

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 7, 2017

The OIG Report is clearly predecisional. It does not constitute “the final Department policy.” Ropella Decl. ¶ 4. … Ropella, in her role as USCP Inspector General, qualifies as a high-ranking government official. Thus, although it is unclear whether Ms.

Nio v. United States Department of Homeland Security

District Court, District of Columbia · May 22, 2019

In fact, at all times relevant to this litigation, the USCIS Policy Manual provided that “[o]ne day of qualifying service is sufficient in establishing eligibility” for the statutory honorable-service requirement. … Other discharge types, such as ‘Other Than Honorable,’ do not qualify as honorable service.”).

Rush v. Samuels

82 F. Supp. 3d 470 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 12, 2015

The BOP’s Administrative Remedy Program The BOP’s Administrative Remedy Program establishes a four-step process for resolution of an inmate’s grievances. … She concluded that “[the plaintiff] clearly had made threats against a federal judge and two law-enforcement officers,” such that “the CIM assignment should remain in effect.” Id. ¶ 7.

Greenspan v. Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 8, 2025

purposes” as implicating personal privacy, only Exemption 7(C) need be considered, 21 since “all information that would fall within the scope of Exemption 6 would also be immune … argues that the CIA has officially acknowledged the existence of records responsive to his FOIA request for records about Tinubu, see supra Part I.A.5, since “there are documents posted on the CIA’s FOIA Reading Room which clearly

Archdiocese of Washington v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 8, 2017

Bowersox Decl. ¶¶ 19–20. 7 Plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction also predicates its claim for relief on the Establishment Clause, but there is no Establishment Clause claim … It also argued, without citation, that because buses travel on public streets, and can be seen from the streets and the sidewalks, they qualify as traditional public fora. Id.; Pl.’s Reply at 2.

International Engineering Company v. Richardson

367 F. Supp. 640 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 24, 1973

The Court’s analysis led it to the conclusion that the APA provided a basis for subject matter jurisdiction and served as a waiver of sovereign immunity. … The instant dispute is clearly one of the “meritorious sheep” as described by the Court of Appeals in Scanwell, supra,, 424 F.2d at 872 .

Costar Group, Inc. v. Leon Capital Group, LLC

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 7, 2022

But this case law does not establish that Leon Capital—as opposed to its CEO—indirectly competes with CREXi. … But the only statutory term at the center of this argument is “protected computers,” and there is no dispute that CoStar’s proprietary and password-protected database qualifies.

Foley v. Carter

526 F. Supp. 977 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 16, 1981

Aside from the established principle that “repeals by implication are not favored,” Posadas v. … The salaries of bankruptcy judges were established by section 411 of Public Law 95-598, 92 Stat. 2688.

United States v. McCarey

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 2, 2019

However, several federal courts have addressed this issue and concluded that a defendant acquitted by reason of insanity does not qualify as a “prisoner” under a sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255(a). … McCarey clearly, confidently, consistently, and lucidly answered all the Court’s questions. Moreover, the Court observed that Ms. McCarey appeared and sounded to be clear of mind.

Huff v. Vilsack

195 F. Supp. 3d 343 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 5, 2016

The National Appeals Division (“NAD”), which was established as a department within the USDA, was part of that endeavor. See id. §§ 6991(6), 6992(a). … First of all, the Director points out, RD had clearly referenced subsection (a)(4) as part of its analysis in the June 24th letter, and far from ignoring this critical aspect of RD’s decision, the Hearing Officer had “paraphrase

Mahnke v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

821 F. Supp. 2d 125 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 20, 2011

defendant argues in its brief that it seeks to question the plaintiff and witnesses regarding their “knowledge” of this regulation because “evidence of an individual’s lack of knowledge or appreciation for the law is clearly … Of course, such a stipulation need not constitute a stipulation that the expert is in fact qualified to offer expert opinion testimony.”).

United States v. GTE Corp.

603 F. Supp. 730 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 13, 1984

Nothing herein immunizes the activities of GTE, the GTOCs, or the acquired entities from the operation of the antitrust laws. B. … In addition, the decree does not immunize GTE from an otherwise appropriate action under the antitrust laws. 46 .

Martini v. Federal National Mortgage Ass'n

977 F. Supp. 464 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 10, 1997

The jury clearly believed the Plaintiff and her evidence and rejected the evidence and interpretation of that evidence presented by the Defendants. … They argued that the Report, which was clearly hearsay, was admissible as a business record.

Garcia v. Pompeo

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 13, 2020

Moreover, Plaintiff has not established the “broad effect” required to establish a constitutionally cognizable injury under the stigma-plus theory. Plaintiff’s claimed reputational harm is narrow. … Accordingly, “[c]ourts have an obligation to listen to those claims clearly and to consider them carefully.” Id. And, in National Federal of Federal Employees v. Greenberg, the D.C.

DSMC, INC. v. Convera Corp.

479 F. Supp. 2d 68 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 27, 2007

Convera counters that DSMCi cannot establish improper means because Conv-era accessed the NGTL website and database with passwords provided by NGTL. … The conspiracy claims in the Third Amended Complaint are clearly focused on misappropriation of trade secrets. *84 In MicroStrategy, Inc. v.

Wyandotte Nation v. Salazar

825 F. Supp. 2d 261 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 22, 2011

As the defendant notes, “[acquisition of the property into trust would establish tribal sovereignty over the land, thereby implicating considerable economic, political, and legal interests.” … Moreover, the defendant, as the moving party and the only party residing in the District of Columbia, clearly does not anticipate any issues of convenience associated with transferring the litigation to Kansas.

Neese v. United States Department of Justice

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 28, 2022

Cir. 2015) (“[A]lthough a rule is not generally considered to be a statute, [Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e)] qualifies as one under FOIA because the Congress has enacted it into positive law.”). … And courts must ensure than an agency “establish[es] a rational nexus between the investigation and one of the agency’s law enforcement duties and a connection between an individual or incident and a . . .

Breiner-Sanders v. Georgetown University

118 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 5, 1999

Schweiker, 665 F.2d 936, 940-41 (9th Cir.1982) (“Both [issue and claim preclusion] are qualified or rejected when their application would contravene an overriding public policy or result in manifest injustice.”) … Breiner-Sanders’ rank and seniority “as nearly as possible,” a standard that clearly provided Dr. Walsh with some discretion in allocating office facilities. Dr.

Cruise Connections Charter Management 1, LP v. Attorney General of Canada

764 F. Supp. 2d 155 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 15, 2011

Circuit that the district court has jurisdiction over this case under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1602-11 , 1 the Court turns to the Government of Canada’s motion to dismiss on the ground of … Morin thereafter insisted that the RCMP would not be responsible for any taxes, which Cruise Connections asserts were clearly RCMP’s responsibility under the Project Services Agreement and all previous representations by