Case law

Troutman v. Kijakazi

District Court, S.D. Texas · Sep 6, 2023

If a claimant establishes at step four that [he] is unable to perform [his] past relevant work, the burden shifts to the Commissioner at step five to establish that the claimant can perform other work which exists … qualified to testify as an expert on the number of jobs in the economy.

Pirelli Armstrong Tire Corp. Retiree Medical Benefits Trust v. Dynegy, Inc.

339 F. Supp. 2d 804 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 7, 2004

Affirmative defenses may support dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) where facts alleged in plaintiffs’ complaint clearly establish that the action is barred. … The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing control, and the defendant bears the *829 burden of establishing good faith. Thompson, 636 F.2d at 958 & n. 23. B.

Webb v. Lumpkin

District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 28, 2023

established” Supreme Court precedent. … To constitute an “unreasonable application” of clearly established federal law, the state court’s determination “must be objectively unreasonable, not merely wrong; even clear error will not suffice.”

Naghani v. Shell Expatriate Employment US Inc

District Court, S.D. Texas · May 18, 2020

Initially, Naghani must establish a prima facie case of national origin discrimination by showing that: (1) he belongs to a protected group; (2) he was qualified for the position; (3) Shell discharged him; and (4) Shell replaced … The conduct clearly affected the work of Naghani[.]” Dkt. 39 at 31-32. That cannot satisfy his prima facie case. Cf.

Lennar Homes of Texas Sales & Marketing, Ltd. v. Perry Homes, LLC

117 F. Supp. 3d 913 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Jul 24, 2015

, the only remaining validity, issues are whether Lennar in fact owns the underlying works, i.e., whether the prior iterations were original to Lennar, 40 and whether the works as *930 a whole are. copyrightable. 41 “To qualify … Nevertheless, in light of statutory text and legislative history, consideration of works "as. a whole” is clearly appropriate in architectural cases. See also Eng’g Dynamics, Inc. v.

Finster v. Kijakazi

District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 1, 2024

Applicants must prove “disability” to qualify for benefits. Id. § 423(d)(1)(A). … The Act places the burden of establishing disability on the claimant. Perez v. Barnhart, 415 F.3d 457, 461 (5th Cir. 2005).

In re New Era Enterprises Inc. Data Incident Litigation

District Court, S.D. Texas · Feb 4, 2026

A plaintiff does not need to allege a past injury to establish standing. … Aug. 26, 2025) (holding that government immunity barred the plaintiffs’ suit arising out of a data breach of a hospital because the diminished value of their personal information is a financial, not a personal, injury under

Ahmadi v. Downey

District Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 31, 2021

require a court to dismiss a case at any time if the court determines that the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … In addition to the legal basis of the complaint, section 1915 empowers a court to pierce the veil of the complainant’s factual allegations they are clearly baseless. Denton v.

Princeton Excess and Surplus Lines Insurance Company v. US Global Security Incorporated

District Court, S.D. Texas · Sep 24, 2019

The parties all agree that Princeton’s insureds – Treasures, and its manager, Jason Brannen – qualify as additional insureds under this endorsement to the Policy. … Zurich, 268 S.W.3d at 491). 10 P:\ORDERS\11-2018\2705MsSJ.wpd 190924.0831 If the complaint in the underlying lawsuit clearly

Trinseo, S.A. v. Harper

District Court, S.D. Texas · Dec 12, 2023

It is not the duty of the Court to search the record for evidence that might establish an issue of material fact. Id. Wil. … “This requires that the plaintiff ‘clearly refer to tangible trade secret material’ rather than a ‘system which potentially qualifies for trade secret protection.’” Id. at *10 (quoting JnteliClear, LLC v.

Parker v. Hyperdynamics Corp.

126 F. Supp. 3d 830 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 25, 2015

Meaningful cautionary statements do not include boilerplate disclaimers but include “specific, concrete explanations that clearly identified and quantified the clearly present financial dangers.” Lormand v. … Plaintiffs have not, however, established that FCPA violations occurred.

Rivens-Baker Jr v. Riley

District Court, S.D. Texas · Sep 19, 2023

If the plaintiff seeks only retroactive relief, Eleventh Amendment immunity bars the claim. See Green, 474 US. at 71. … Without establishing that a constitutional right was violated, Rivens-Baker is not entitled-to relief under § 1983.

Honorable Terry Petteway v. Galveston County, Texas

District Court, S.D. Texas · May 15, 2023

Id. 156–157 This email and the attached map are not clearly seeking or giving legal advice. … “[T]he legislative privilege for state lawmakers is, at best, one which is qualified.” Jefferson, 849 F.3d at 624.

Vargas v. Salazar & Son's Group LLC

District Court, S.D. Texas · Jul 8, 2025

Plaintiff does not cite any authority to support her argument that only work “directly related to customer service” qualifies as support work for which Defendant may utilize the tip credit. … The time records establish that Plaintiff never worked in excess of 40 hours per week during her employment. ECF 77-4.

Williams v. Dejoy

District Court, S.D. Texas · Jul 9, 2025

App'x 298 (5th Cir. 2019) (EEOC intake questionnaire does not typically qualify as the charge). The deadlines under 29 C.F.R. § 1614.407 are calculated from the filing date of this formal complaint. … Procedural Dismissals Do Not Qualify as Exhaustion Even assuming arguendo that Plaintiff's claims were timely filed, they would still fail for lack of proper exhaustion.

LaKemper

District Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 5, 2026

This evidence is not sufficient to establish sex discrimination. … “To establish a prima facie case of retaliation, the plaintiff must establish that: (1) he participated in an activity protected by Title VII; (2) his employer took an adverse employment action against him; and (3) a causal

Munoz v. Intercontinental Terminals Company LLC

District Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 2, 2023

But, the CSB report clearly holds that the atmospheric tank exemption in § 1910.119 applies to Tank 80-8’s operations. … industry and the expert sought to utilize the regulation to establish the standard of care aboard a vessel. Id.

Minton v. Intercontinental Terminals Company, LLC

District Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 2, 2023

But, the CSB report clearly holds that the atmospheric tank exemption in § 1910.119 applies to Tank 80-8’s operations. … industry and the expert sought to utilize the regulation to establish the standard of care aboard a vessel. Id.

Bosley v. Kijakazi

District Court, S.D. Texas · Jan 24, 2025

First, Plaintiff argues the mental limitations in her RFC are unsupported by a medical opinion and the record does not clearly establish the effect of Plaintiff’s mental impairments on her ability to work. … Second, Plaintiff argues the physical limitations in the RFC are not supported by a medical opinion and the record does not clearly establish the effect her impairments have on her ability to walk or stand.

9000 Airport LLC v. Hager

District Court, S.D. Texas · Nov 9, 2023

But this does not immunize the statute. First, a statute cannot shield itself from targeting a protected behavior by requiring an additional behavior for the statute to trigger. … alone, however, it cannot justify the special treatment of [a targeted business], for an alternative means of achieving the same interest without raising concerns under the First Amendment is clearly