Case law

LEBOON v. EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC (EIS)

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 7, 2020

LeBoon’s exhibits to the proposed second amended complaint and his memorandum in support of his motion for leave to file a second amended complaint establish that counsel for Equifax responded to Mr, LeBoon the same day … This is not a factual inaccuracy that could have been uncovered by a reasonable reinvestigation, but rather a legal issue that a credit agency such as [the defendant ] is neither qualified nor obligated to resolve under

HALMAN ALDUBI PROVIDENT AND PENSION FUNDS LTD. v. TEVA PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 3, 2023

Plaintiff clearly refers to stocks purchased on the TASE. … Jan. 25, 2016) (“Adequacy of representation is met by a two-fold showing: that (1) class counsel is competent and qualified to conduct the litigation; and (2) class representatives have no conflicts of interests.”).

WINDISH v. 3M COMPANY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 12, 2024

The Third Circuit has held that, under Africa, opposition to vaccination does not qualify when it is grounded only in medical judgments, such as a concern that taking a shot “may do more harm than good,” or in “‘isolated … established at trial, would support recovery by plaintiff,” this factor weighs against dismissal. Poulis, 747 F.2d at 870.

WOOD v. SAROJ AND MANJU INVESTMENTS PHILADELPHIA LLC

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 28, 2020

Howard well qualified to pursue this suit, but they have done so with vigor. They have invested almost 300 hours into litigating this case. (Suppl. Prelim. … The burden of establishing that the members of the proposed collective are “similarly situated” within the meaning of § 216(b) is on the plaintiff. Karlo v.

LIBERTY RESOURCES, INC. v. THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 1, 2023

Title II of the ADA provides, “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the … The relief provided is clearly in the public interest.

HIGHTOWER v. VALLEY FORGE MILITARY ACADEMY & COLLEGE

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 10, 2022

Here, Valley Forge does not qualify as a state actor under any of the tests. … The facts set forth in Hightower’s complaint fail, as a matter of law, to establish that Valley Forge is a state actor for § 1983 purposes.

COULTER v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 2020

Here, at the very least, Plaintiff has clearly and specifically set forth facts showing that her credit score was lowered as a result of Defendant’s actions. … It contends that, because of this, Plaintiffs claims fail as a matter of law as “furnishers are ‘neither qualified nor obligated to resolve’ matters that ‘turn[] on questions that can only be resolved by a court of law.

United States v. Kemp

379 F. Supp. 2d 690 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 20, 2005

The Third Circuit recently summarized the criteria necessary to establish a Brady violation. In U.S. v. Pelullo, the Third Circuit stated: In Brady v. … Clearly, the issue in these cases — what a defendant must show in order to establish a violation of the Fifth or Sixth Amendment in cases where the government has deported potential witnesses — is inapplicable here.

Noasha LLC v. Nordic Group of Companies, Ltd.

630 F. Supp. 2d 544 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 18, 2009

In order to qualify for Lanham Act protection, a mark must either be suggestive, arbitrary, or fanciful, or must be descriptive with a demonstration of secondary meaning. … While it still “takes very little evidence to establish the existence of the actual confusion factor,” id., quoting Am-Brit, Inc. v.

KOVALEV v. LIDL US, LLC

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 21, 2022

Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint clearly satisfied all elements of the jurisdiction inquiry and Defendant Lidl Stiftung & Co. KG is a subject of this Court [sic] Jurisdiction[.] … As in Gall, in which the court noted that the consumption of water and its related uses did not qualify as a particular purpose, so too is Plaintiff’s allegation about the consumption of bread insufficient to establish

QUINNONES PRAT v. SAUL

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 25, 2023

an Ages and Stages Questionnaire (“ASQ-SE”) which suggested concerns in the areas of social-emotional development, and noted reports that Plaintiff has difficulty sharing, taking turns, and communicating his needs with clearly … To the contrary, the regulations provide that in order for a child to meet Listing 111.09(A) or 111.09(B), “we need documentation from a qualified professional that your neurological disorder has resulted in” either a speech

Clark v. George Junior Republic

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 18, 2025

(A) a program is incrementally structured through a particular course of study or training, whether full- or part-time; (B) a program allows participants to earn a degree or diploma, qualify … The Plaintiffs are clearly discussing George Junior Republic, a named Defendant.

United States v. Cianfrani

448 F. Supp. 1102 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 27, 1978

The Court also held that the order prohibiting reports or commentary on judicial proceedings held in public was clearly invalid and that, to the extent to which the order prohibited publication based on information gained … App.D.C. 252, 511 F.2d 818 (1975), the court dealt with a trial court’s failure to hold a pretrial evidentiary hearing to determine if certain evidence was the fruit of testimony given under a grant of immunity.

KENNEY v. AMERICAN BOARD OF INTERNAL MEDICINE

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 26, 2019

Because of this presentation by ABIM, Kenney appears less qualified to patients, hospitals, insurance companies, medical corporations, other employers, and other. (Id.) … Clearly, the first two elements of unjust enrichment are met for Plaintiffs that purchased MOC.

PUGH v. COMMUNITY HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 10, 2023

So “children who had birth asphyxia, Apgar score < 7 at 5 minutes and resuscitation clearly are at increased risk of ASD.” Id. … “Thus, a cause-effect relationship need not be clearly established by animal or epidemiological studies before a doctor can testify that, in [their] opinion, such a relationship exists.” Id. at 1535.

Neal v. Carey Canadian Mines, Ltd.

548 F. Supp. 357 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 31, 1982

Labowski’s testimony sufficiently establishes that Mr. … NAAC argues that the question was clearly prejudicial to NAAC.

BOMBIN v. SOUTHWEST AIRLINES CO.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 27, 2023

Bennett’s damages methodology is irrelevant and unreliable because it is contrary to established law, (2) Dr. … A witness is qualified to provide expert testimony only if the witness has “specialized expertise” in the testimony’s subject matter. Schneider ex rel. Est. of Schneider v. Fried, 320 F.3d 396, 404 (3d Cir. 2003).

JEAVONS v. O'MALLEY

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 19, 2025

A “mental impairment must be established by objective medical evidence from an acceptable medical source.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1521, 416.921. … The ALJ’s decision clearly weighed both psychologists’ opinions and found that they were “not persuasive” because the record did “not establish a mental health impairment that significantly restrict[ed Jennifer J.’s]

LUNEMANN v. KOOMA III LLC

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 8, 2024

Here, the class counsel—Peter Winebrake, Esquire, and Michelle Tolodziecki, Esquire, of Winebrake & Santillo, LLC—are qualified to “fairly and adequately represent the interests of the class.” Fed. R. Civ. … The fourth and fifth factors—risks of establishing liability and damages—also counsel in favor of approving the settlement.

Robert Hawthorne, Inc. v. Director of Internal Revenue

406 F. Supp. 1098 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 3, 1976

Thus, the government clearly has the ultimate “obligation to return the originals of the books and papers” subpoenaed. … He will obtain immunity grants and . . . will ultimately draft the indictment or information, if one is needed. Panel and Discussion— . . .