Case law

United States v. Glover

174 F. Supp. 3d 431 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2016

Thus, Glover’s claim that his counsel failed to investigate and learn of his heroin addiction is clearly contradicted by the record. … In Jones, the Court held that In order to qualify as a person aggrieved by an unlawful search and seizure, one must have been a victim of a search and seizure, one against whom the search was directed

Bajaj v. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (Hud)

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 18, 2025

Neither set of arguments, however, is sufficient to establish pretext. … As such, she was not qualified to receive advanced sick leave.

Fischer v. Federal Bureau of Investigation

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 13, 2010

“To qualify, a document must thus satisfy two conditions: its source must be a Government agency, and it must fall within the ambit of a privilege against discovery under judicial standards that would govern litigation … Supp. 2d at 44. 16 (rejecting plaintiff’s segregation claim where agency declaration “very clearly declare[d], under penalty of perjury . . . that ‘all reasonably segregable

Freeman v. United States Department of the Interior

37 F. Supp. 3d 313 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 16, 2014

. § 29).5 To qualify for a patent, the applicant must establish that the mining claim is valid. United States v. Shumway, 199 F.3d 1093, 1101‒02 (9th Cir. 1999) (“[N]o right arose from an invalid claim.”). The D.C. … of an intervening right that precludes [plaintiff] from establishing a discovery.”

Educational Assistance Foundation for the Descendants of Hungarian Immigrants in the Performing Arts, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

32 F. Supp. 3d 35 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 27, 2014

The party asserting the privilege, even if disclosure of the communication was inadvertent, bears the burden of establishing each of these three elements. … Dep’t of Corrs., 262 F.R.D. 45, 55 (D.D.C. 2009) (commenting that it was a “debatable proposition” that attempting to rectify an inadvertent disclosure fifty-five days after discovery qualified as sufficiently prompt to

Sionyx, LLC v. Hamamatsu Photonics K.K.

330 F. Supp. 3d 574 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 30, 2018

HC, as the petitioner, and HPK, as an identified real party-in-interest in the IPR, clearly fall within the statutory definition. … But it is at least doubtful, in light of Halo , whether evidence establishing that an infringer should have known of the existence of certain patents (but did not know their exact contents) can suffice to establish that it

Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 3, 2011

To demonstrate that a document is predecisional, the burden is on the agency to “establish[ ] what deliberative process is involved, and the role played by the documents in issue in the course of that process.” … Plaintiff asserts, without explanation, that only a portion of this document (a two-page staff comment) can validly qualify under Exemption 5.

Jackson v. Mayorkas

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 27, 2024

Such gaps are too lengthy to establish a causal link based on temporal proximity alone. See Bergbauer v. Mabus, 934 F. … Jackson clearly engaged in protected activity by agreeing to serve as a witness in Mr.

Yah Kai World Wide Enterprises, Inc. v. Napper

District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 21, 2018

This focused effort is warranted, because the record clearly establishes Napper’s deliberate disregard for Prince Immanuel’s trademark rights, and thus Plaintiffs are entitled to the Restaurant’s profits during the period … Taco Cabana, Inc., 505 U.S. 763, 768 (1992) (“[I]t is common ground that § 43(a) protects qualifying unregistered trademarks and that the general principles qualifying a mark for registration under § 2 of the Lanham Act

Blue Water Fisherman's Ass'n v. Mineta

122 F. Supp. 2d 150 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 25, 2000

NMFS has established that this is not a reasonable alternative which would further conservation objectives. … The conservation benefits could be derived only from a subset of fishers, namely, those fishers near established time/area closures.

Federal Trade Commission v. Facebook Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 28, 2021

Plaintiff alleges that Instagram’s photo- sharing app also qualifies as a PSN service, meaning that it was a direct competitor to Facebook Blue. Id., ¶ 63. … June 10, 2004) (explaining that a course-of-conduct liability theory cannot “allow for clearly legal acts to be thrown into the mix to bolster a plaintiff’s antitrust case”).

Poett v. United States of America

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 29, 2009

Defendant Weyant nonetheless determined that Plaintiff’s application should be denied, finding that—although Plaintiff is not a “restricted person” under 18 U.S.C. § 175b—he qualifies as an “individual who the Attorney … Although the FBI clearly indicated that it suspected Plaintiff of having involvement with NORAID, the Court cannot ascertain from the administrative record whether the FBI also suspected that such involvement was “knowing

Streicher v. Prescott

663 F. Supp. 335 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 19, 1987

Defendants offer no support for their attempt to establish a hierarchy of constitutional rights. … Defendants contended that these prior commitments were proof that Bolton was clearly insane and would not benefit from a rehearing.

Electronic Privacy Information Center v. United States Drug Enforcement Agency

192 F. Supp. 3d 92 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 24, 2016

Moreover, the nature of the Hemisphere program, which clearly implicates controversial law- enforcement techniques and privacy rights as evidenced by this lawsuit, satisfies the Court that it is objectively … Dept. of Justice, 57 F.3d 803, 815 (9th Cir. 1995) (holding that use of a pretext phone call did not qualify for protection because the technique is generally known to the public) (citing National Sec. Archive v.

Electronic Privacy Information Center v. United States Department of Homeland Security

999 F. Supp. 2d 61 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 15, 2013

The first step "is to establish the 'lodestar': the number of hours reasonably expended multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate." Nat'l Ass'n of Concerned Veterans v. Sec'y of Def., 675 F.2d 1319, 1323 (D.C. … Cir. 1980) (en banc) ("[W]e ask only that the district court judges exercise their discretion as conscientiously as possible, and state their reasons as clearly as possible.").

Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics v. Office of Administration

559 F. Supp. 2d 9 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 16, 2008

OA’s Establishment and Functions The Office of Administration was established as a unit within the EOP by President James Carter’s Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1977. … Circuit has explained that “while a definite structure may be a prerequisite to qualify as an establishment within the executive branch ... not every establishment is an agency under the FOIA.”

Public Citizen Health Research Group v. National Institutes of Health

209 F. Supp. 2d 37 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 12, 2002

. § S710a(e)(7)(A), is a. qualifying statute under exemption 3. DeLorme Pub. Co., Inc. v. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin, of U.S. Dep’t of Commerce, 917 F.Supp. 867, 872 (D.Me.1996). … As amply demonstrated above, the competitive harm to the licensees has been clearly demonstrated.

Virtus Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. Garland

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 22, 2021

Even Virtus’s Director couches his financial predictions in qualifying language, noting that Virtus Smith Decl., ECF No. 3-2, at ¶ 42 (emphasis added). … Given these offsetting concerns, the balance of the hardships does not clearly tip in Virtus’s favor.

Kabakova v. Office of the Architect of the Capitol

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 14, 2020

The record establishes that plaintiff raised those claims in 18-AC-53 and then saw that matter through to the end of mediation. … Touching a person’s knee while delivering tough feedback and occasional hugging clearly do not cross that line. See Hilt– Dyson v.

Butler v. Schapiro

67 F. Supp. 3d 59 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 8, 2014

It is clearly the motion to amend that is crucial, not its timing. … economy or even the season, see also Def.’s Ex. 23 at 19, ECF No. 42-23 (Burke-Sanow testifying that “I personally have to have work to give work.”), and normally “[a]n employer has discretion to assign work to equally qualified