Case law

PISANI v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 31, 2023

At Step Three, Judge Tirrell determined that Todd did not have “an impairment or combination of impairments” that qualified under the Administration’s listed impairments. … at 20-21 (citing Exs. 3F, 5F, 6F, 10F).)* Todd also argues that Judge Tirrell should have found the B Criteria were met because “the Plaintiffs ability to interact with others is clearly to an extreme

KING v. ETHICON, INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 29, 2022

Based on citations to medical literature, she alleges that the polypropylene mesh used in the TVT “is biologically incompatible with human tissue and promotes an immune response,” which causes “degradation of the pelvic … Other Negligence Theories In her Opposition, Plaintiff highlights allegations in the negligence count that purportedly qualify as alternative theories upon which she bases her negligence

WOOD v. BOROUGH OF WOODLYNNE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 2, 2023

Defendant has not established “good cause” for the issuance of a protective order because he has not described any “clearly defined and serious injury” that would result from the discovery of his prior IA and personnel … Jan. 28, 2021) (holding that a party’s assertions of improper motives, which were not substantiated by specific examples, did not establish good cause for granting a protective order).

HUGHES v. CERTIFIED CREDIT & COLLECTION BUREAU

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 27, 2021

Plaintiff appears to assail the second sentence for failing to qualify that the writing must include language disputing the debt. (See Pl.’s Opp’n Br. 21-22.) … (citations omitted)).* To be fair, Defendants’ letter could have conveyed the statutory requirements more clearly.

MUTASA v. U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 1, 2022

To successfully complete this process, the applicant’s employer must first obtain a labor certification from the Department of Labor attesting that there are no qualified workers in the United States available to take … It is well established that an agency may change its prior policy if “the new policy is permissible under the statute, and the agency ... acknowledges it is changing its policy and shows that there are good reasons for

S.W. v. ELIZABETH BOARD OF EDUCATION

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 17, 2022

Section 504 “requires school districts receiving federal funding to provide a FAPE to each qualified handicapped person within the recipient’s jurisdiction.” Blunt v. Lower Merion Sch. … On September 6, 2019, S.W. emailed the District contending the IEP clearly stated J.J.W.’s transportation was to be door-to-door, which had not taken place, and the District’s letters regarding the corner bus stop did not

BRG HARRISON LOFTS URBAN RENEWAL LLC v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 5, 2021

According to the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), Thomas Edison established a light bulb factory in Harrison, New Jersey in 1882. … AMEC is clearly correct. The positions, responsibilities, and conduct of EWMA and AMEC, as alleged in the 3PC, are very different.

GWARA v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 25, 2022

Under this definition, a plaintiff qualifies as disabled only if her physical or mental impairments are of such severity that she is not only unable to perform her past relevant work … Multiple courts in the Third Circuit have explained a report by a consultative examiner is not “inadequate or incomplete” if it clearly outlines the medical examination but the ALJ disagrees

SALOME v. ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY COORDINATOR

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 14, 2021

Asao is qualified to perform the surgery or responsible for scheduling the surgery with an oral surgeon. See Casilla v. New Jersey State Prison, 381 F. … Plaintiff cannot establish a reasonable probability of eventual success on a claim that he has not raised in the amended complaint.

ADESANYA v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 31, 2022

At step three, the ALJ determined that Plaintiff did not have “an impairment or combination of impairments” that qualified under the Administration’s listed impairments. … Hundle’s opinions were not clearly supported by objective findings and instead appear to have been largely based upon the claimant’s subjective complaints.

OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF UNSECURED CREDITORS v. INVITAE CORPORATION

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 11, 2025

Invitae’s Board also established a Special Commnittee to “evaluate strategic alternatives.” (AD0766-AD0767 J 8 & n.2.) … Swift); see also AD1189 ¥ 15 (“At the outset of the auction, the Debtors only had one qualified bid for $180 million from Labcorp.

Laidlaw, Inc. v. Student Transportation of America, Inc.

20 F. Supp. 2d 727 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 14, 1998

Travelways, Inc., then Laidlaw, Inc.’s subsidiary, was incorporated in the State of Delaware and was qualified and authorized to do business in New Jersey. (Ex. P-84.) 41. … “Establishing a risk of irreparable harm is not enough.” ECRI v. McGraw-Hill, Inc., 809 F.2d 223, 226 (3d Cir.1987).

LEE v. ELECTRIFAI, LLC

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 13, 2024

As for ElectrifAi and White Oak, Plaintiff does not allege any public policy – let alone one that is clearly mandated – which was purportedly violated. … such “that there is a substantial nexus between the complained-of conduct” and the law at issue.” 8 Neither the Amended Complaint nor Plaintiff’s opposition papers refer explicitly – or allude – to conduct that could qualify

MYERS v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 13, 2020

Sequential Evaluation Process The Social Security Act establishes a three-step sequential evaluation process for determining whether a child is disabled within the meaning of the statute … As previously discussed, before a child’s impairment can be regarded as the functional equivalent of a listed impairment, it must be established that the child has a marked limitation in two domains of functioning or an

MILLTOWN-FORD AVENUE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY v. United States

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 30, 2025

Berger, who is clearly an interested party, and of whose Certification is devoid of any usable data from which the Court can make any reliable calculation or quantification of lost revenue, to the extent there was any. … Lastly, SB Building has failed to provide any relevant analysis by an expert or qualified individual regarding the same.

BLACKMAN v. NORTHEAST SPINE & SPORTS MEDICINE, LLC

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 13, 2025

Even then, however, it can still poise the victim to endure the kind of future harm that qualifies as “imminent.” Id. at 152 (citations omitted). … There is no ambiguity; it clearly does not assert discrete counts for fraud under the NJCFA or for unjust enrichment.

United States v. Local 560 (I.B.T.)

694 F. Supp. 1158 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 28, 1988

The evidence clearly points to the fact that the members view the leadership of the Local as a single, monolithic control organization. … Cohen represented, decided to establish a prepaid legal services plan for its members.

HINES v. LANIGAN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 26, 2024

The Court finds that Plaintiff has not established that he was deterred from filing grievances. … HILLMAN, U.S.D.J. 4 As the Court has awarded summary judgment to Defendants on all claims, it is unnecessary to address their qualified immunity arguments.

Miller v. Beneficial Management Corp.

855 F. Supp. 691 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 21, 1994

D.C.Cir.1981) (“Even assuming, arguendo, that the company’s failure to consider the applications was discriminatory, the company was entitled to prove at trial that the [plaintiffs] had not been injured because they were not qualified … To the extent her removal of documents compromised these operations, Miller clearly breached an integral condition of the terms of her employment. 37 .

Alphonso v. Pitney Bowes, Inc.

356 F. Supp. 2d 442 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 7, 2005

First, Defendants assert that Plaintiffs counsel refused to drop Plaintiffs claim for post-1999 economic damages when the claim was clearly frivolous. … Meyerson, who knew nothing about Pitney Bowes’ criteria for promotion (id. at 87-88), was not aware of any promotion opportunities for which he assumed Plaintiff qualified (id. at 87) and had no information about how or what