Case law

Samuelson v. Jewell School District 8

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 26, 2024

Because he does not argue this claim in his briefing or clearly allege it, the Court does not address it. … The FAC, however, does not allege a claim for retaliatory arrest, or even clearly allege that Plaintiff was arrested. See supra note 17.

Center for Biological Diversity v. United States Fish & Wildlife Service

402 F. Supp. 2d 1198 · District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 16, 2005

Clearly, the science is evolving, causing NOAA Fisheries to present the questions to the panels of scientists for study. … No, clearly, CCT habitat needs are not the same as watershed condition.

Lund v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 11, 2023

An impairment that manifests only some of those criteria, no matter how severely, does not qualify. Jd. … An independent review of the record establishes that the ALJ properly considered the’ objective medical record in discounting the Plaintiffs subjective symptom testimony.

Kohl v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 3, 2022

explained that even if the Court accepted the argument that the ALJ needed to perform a DAA analysis, any error was harmless because the ALJ “did consider whether Plaintiff would be disabled if he stopped using drugs by qualifying … The Ninth Circuit explained that “[i]f—and only if—the ALJ found [the claimant] was disabled under the five-step inquiry, should the ALJ have evaluated the role of [the claimant’s] alcohol dependency, if any, in establishing

Hill v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · May 20, 2024

Plaintiff alleges disability based on tingling/numbness from head to toe, tremors, vision loss, short term memory loss, balance issues, aching joints, depression, fatigue, and immune … Kijakazi, 32 F.4th 785, 792 (9th Cir. 2022) (“The revised social security regulations are clearly irreconcilable with our caselaw according special deference to the opinions of treating and examining physicians on account

Gabriel v. Broadspire Services, Inc.

District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 10, 2020

Defendants argue that Gabriel fails to allege that she opposed any practices, made a complaint, or caused a proceeding to occur as required by the statute (Mot. to Dismiss at 4), but the statute also clearly protects an … Cal. 2015) (denying the employer’s motion for summary judgment because the plaintiff’s name on a Department of Labor list of witnesses for an audit qualified as a “protected activity” under the Fair Labor Standards Act

Powell's Books, Inc. v. Myers

599 F. Supp. 2d 1226 · District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 12, 2008

Generally, to establish constitutional standing, “a plaintiff ‘must show that (1) it has suffered an ‘injury in fact’ that is (a) concrete and particularized and (b) actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical; (2 … Rather, they follow the rule that speech integral to the commission of a crime is unprotected under the First Amendment. 16 “It rarely has been suggested that the constitutional freedom for speech and press extends its immunity

Flir Systems, Inc. v. Sierra Media, Inc.

903 F. Supp. 2d 1120 · District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 9, 2012

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, a witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if: (1) the expert’s scientific … That is not enough under Oregon law to establish malice.

Fredrickson v. Starbucks Corp.

980 F. Supp. 2d 1227 · District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 29, 2013

Gemperle’s declarations, then, I find Starbucks has established by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy in this matter exceeds $5,000,000. … See Lippitt, 340 F.3d at 1044 (clearly distinguishing cases which “directly challenge a right or liability’’ under federal law from those which “implicate” a federal law).

Doty v. Fox Head, Inc.

District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 6, 2019

The party seeking removal bears the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that removal is proper. Moore-Thomas, 553 F.3d at 1244. … e-mail itself clearly and unequivocally provides the requisite notice of removability” and that “context” and the defendant’s “subjective knowledge of Ms.

Kandra v. United States

145 F. Supp. 2d 1192 · District Court, D. Oregon · Apr 30, 2001

In light of the diverse water demands, Reclamation initiated a public process to establish a new long-term operating plan. … The regulations clearly allow an agency to prepare an EA "on any action at any time” to assist in planning. 40 C.F.R. § 1501.3 (b). 5 . Three declarants, however, do not appear to be parties to this litigation.

Boyle v. Nelson

District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 24, 2025

Plaintiff alleges that Hudson’s presence was inappropriate, but does not clearly identify what constitutional right, if any, was implicated by Hudson’s presence at the settlement conferences. … Mere negligence is not sufficient to establish liability. Farmer, 511 U.S. at 835.

PharmacyChecker.com LLC v. LegitScript LLC

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 7, 2024

concluded: It would contravene Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit precedent for this Court to fashion a new rule that deprives a plaintiff of an antitrust cause of action and immunize … PharmacyChecker argues, however, that the Ninth Circuit has spoken to even more egregious conduct—whether direct illegality by an antitrust plaintiff negates that plaintiff’s antitrust standing—and has clearly answered

Mil-Ray v. EVP International, LLC

District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 8, 2021

A qualifying transaction is “defined as any sale consummated by [defendant] to a Customer . . . that has been introduced by [plaintiff] through the procedures set forth on Addendum A to this Agreement.” … The wireless agreement contained a narrow arbitration clause, which clearly covered the contractual claims.

City of Portland v. Iheanacho

District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 7, 2022

The moving party has the burden of establishing the absence of a genuine issue of material fact. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986). … Nothing in the record here reflects that defendants clearly and unequivocally manifested an intent to forgo the requirements of the “Notice of Default” provisions. See Anderson v.

In re Lumber Inc.

124 F. Supp. 302 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 2, 1954

That is clearly the power and duty of the bankruptcy courts under the reorganization sections. In Taylor v. … The evidence does not establish what stock he had in mind, nor is there any evidence that Bradley ever disposed of his stock in the bankrupt.

Rust-Oleum Corporation v. NIC Industries, Inc.

District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 15, 2025

The first factor, whether Rust-Oleum’s conduct was “willful or malicious,” ORS § 20.075(1)(a), is already established. … Bonaparte to be well-qualified Page 9 — Opinion and Order to offer such an opinion. Moreover, the report is well-supported and uses credible methodology.

Coltrain v. McDonough

District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 29, 2025

; (2) he was qualified for the position; (3) he suffered an adverse employment action; and (4) similarly situated individuals outside his protected class were treated more favorably. … Defendant does not dispute that plaintiff is a member of a protected class or was qualified for the position.

JäRLSTRöM v. Aldridge

366 F. Supp. 3d 1205 · District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 28, 2018

This restriction clearly controls and suppresses protected speech, and enforcement of the statute against protected speech is not a hypothetical threat. … Even if the term "engineer" qualifies as potentially misleading commercial speech, the Title laws fail the test articulated in Cent. Hudson Gas & Elec. Corp. v. Pub. Serv.

Smith v. Brown

District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 27, 2021

Rather, the state court’s application of clearly established federal law must be objectively unreasonable. … The clearly established federal law governing ineffective assistance of counsel claims is set forth in Strickland.