Case law

McMinimee v. Yakima School District Number 7

District Court, E.D. Washington · Aug 7, 2019

the balancing test established by 20 Pickering v. … Under these 20 circumstances, the Court cannot say Irion is entitled to qualified immunity, as the 1 complained invasion to her property interest, as alleged, is a well-recognized right 2 established long before her

Wise v. Inslee

District Court, E.D. Washington · Apr 27, 2022

Moreover, the 17 Proclamation recognizes exemptions for those who qualify for accommodations 18 due to their sincerely held religious beliefs; there are no comparable secular 19 exemptions. … Here, the State clearly has a legitimate government 8 interest in preventing the spread of COVID-19, an interest that has been endorsed 9 by the Ninth Circuit. Slidewaters LLC v.

Byrd v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jul 17, 2020

make an adjustment to other work in the national 9 economy, the claimant will be found disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(v). 10 “A finding of ‘disabled’ under the five-step inquiry does not automatically 11 qualify … Defendant further argues 23 the opinion does not clearly comment only on limitations related to mental health, 24 as Ms. Mondragon noted one of Plaintiff’s diagnoses to be severe opioid abuse.

Aguirre v. Kijakazi

District Court, E.D. Washington · Sep 25, 2023

Plaintiff asserts that, contrary to the ALJ’s reasoning, ARNP Campbell did not 2 qualify her assessment of Plaintiff, and she “suggested further workup for the 3 claimant’s memory/focus issues and forgetfulness rather … However, the Ninth Circuit has held that the Social Security 21 1 regulations revised in March 2017 are “clearly irreconcilable with [past Ninth

Lyons v. Kijakazi

District Court, E.D. Washington · Feb 18, 2022

error that is inconsequential to the nondisability determination.14 The 3 party appealing the ALJ’s decision generally bears the burden of establishing … Symptom Reports: Plaintiff establishes consequential error. 7 Plaintiff argues the ALJ failed to provide valid reasons for discounting

Nelson v. Saul

District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 20, 2020

The party appealing the ALJ’s decision generally 15 bears the burden of establishing that it was harmed. Shinseki v. … Tr. 46-48, and when 11 asked what would qualify Plaintiff’s eating disorder under listing 12.13, Dr. 12 Rozenfeld testified, 13 She clearly does have eating

Community Association for Restoration of the Environment Inc v. DBD Washington LLC

District Court, E.D. Washington · Nov 19, 2020

This Protective Order is not intended 17 to address discovery objections to produce, answer, or respond on the grounds of 18 attorney-client privilege or work product immunity nor to preclude either party from 19 seeking … Notwithstanding the 6 Paragraphs above, any person may be examined as a witness at trial or during a 7 deposition concerning any information designated as “CONFIDENTIAL” which 8 that person had authored or been clearly

Binford v. Armstrong

District Court, E.D. Washington · Aug 23, 2021

This provision involves the 24 sovereign immunity of states. … To establish deliberate indifference, a plaintiff must show a purposeful act 15 or failure to act on the part of the defendant and resulting harm.

Maxfield v. Saul

District Court, E.D. Washington · Feb 9, 2021

The 16 ALJ uses a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant 17 qualifies for disability benefits. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. 18 At step one, the ALJ considers the claimant … The claimant has 16 the initial burden of establishing a prima facie case of entitlement to benefits. 17 Rhinehart v. Finch, 438 F.2d 920, 921 (9th Cir. 1971).

Pearson v. Kijakazi

District Court, E.D. Washington · Dec 7, 2021

The party appealing the ALJ’s decision generally 6 bears the burden of establishing that it was harmed. Shinseki v. … Breedlove assessed, and that 8 the ALJ failed to acknowledge that Plaintiff’s ability to perform these activities was 9 qualified by Plaintiff. ECF No. 13 at 17-18.

Boe v. Mead School District

District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 6, 2025

But Johnson very clearly in the affidavit states “I do not have a specific 5 memory of stopping O.B. in the hallway for an informal check-in.” ECF No. 34 at 6 11. … City of 5 Seattle, 128 Wash. 2d at 275. 6 Plaintiffs argue that Defendant’s violation of Section 504 conclusively 7 establishes MSD breached its duty of care to O.B.

Mendoza

District Court, E.D. Washington · Dec 16, 2025

But tasks that aren’t essential, integral, or expected parts of a job are less likely to qualify as 12 apparent conflicts that the ALJ must ask about. … The written interrogatories sent to the VE after the hearing were 7 8 clearly

Waller v. City of Spokane

District Court, E.D. Washington · Nov 8, 2019

Richard 9 Feiner & Co., 896 F.2d 1542, 1550 (9th Cir. 1989) (citations omitted). 10 “Judgment on the pleadings is proper when the moving party clearly establishes on 11 the face of the pleadings that no material … While 14 Penn Plaza dealt with the National Labors Relations Act and the 20 Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the framework is materially the same. 1 negotiated term between the Union and the [employer] easily qualifies

Donahue v. Kijakazi

District Court, E.D. Washington · Feb 3, 2022

An impairment that manifests only some of those criteria, no 10 matter how severely, does not qualify.”)). Further, Plaintiff must establish the 11 impairment satisfies the 12-month durational requirement. … While Plaintiff’s activities alone do not clearly 14 demonstrate Plaintiff is not disabled, the ALJ reasonably found that the objective 15 evidence, along with Plaintiff’s reported ability to control her symptoms with

Runions v. Kijakazi

District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 17, 2023

Remand: Further proceedings are required. 8 The ALJ reversibly erred, but Plaintiff has not clearly established that he 9 was disabled during the relevant period, and he agrees that remand … Conclusion 9 Plaintiff establishes the ALJ erred.

Lawton v. Dudek

District Court, E.D. Washington · Apr 9, 2025

Conclusion 10 Plaintiff establishes the ALJ erred. … Chater, 172 F.3d 31, 35 (1st Cir. 1999) (recognizing 20 that as a lay person, the ALJ is “simply not qualified to interpret raw medical data

Smith v. Kijakazi

District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 20, 2023

In steps one through four, the claimant 24 bears the burden of establishing a prima facie case of disability. Tackett, 180 F.3d 25 at 1098-1099. … It therefore does not qualify as a medical opinion 3 and the ALJ was not required to provide an assessment of its persuasiveness. 4 Furthermore, despite Plaintiff’s assertion, it is not clear whether Mr.

Jensen v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 13, 2020

Although these errors invalidated the 4 ALJ’s conclusion that Plaintiff did not qualify for benefits prior to April 8, 2017, 5 Plaintiff’s entitlement is not clear from the face of the record. … The 13 claimant has the initial burden of establishing a prima facie case of entitlement to 14 disability benefits. Rhinehart v. Finch, 438 F.2d 920, 921 (9th Cir. 1971).

King v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 10, 2020

Although these errors invalidated the ALJ’s conclusion that 11 Plaintiff did not qualify for benefits, Plaintiff’s entitlement is not clear from the face 12 of the record. … Remand, rather than an award of benefits, is appropriate 8 In light of the errors identified above, further proceedings are clearly 9 necessary.

Sotelo v. Kijakazi

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jul 13, 2022

The party appealing the ALJ’s decision generally 1 bears the burden of establishing that it was harmed. Shinseki v. … An impairment that manifests only some of the criteria, 14 no matter how severely, does not qualify. Sullivan, 493 U.S. at 530; Tackett, 180 15 F.3d at 1099.