Case law

L.B. v. Premera Blue Cross

District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 18, 2025

The purpose of medical policies [is] to establish 16 medical necessity criteria for services that are covered services. Q. … The requisite inquiry is “whether Congress has ‘clearly state[d]’ that the rule is jurisdictional,” and 20 in the absence of such clear statement, courts must “treat the restriction as nonjurisdictional in character

Jane Does 1-10 v. University of Washington

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 15, 2020

Bakke, 438 U.S. 265, 7 312 (1978)).) 8 However, the Ninth Circuit held that this court “clearly erred in determining that 9 Doe[] [Plaintiffs] 1, 2, … to 19 establish that involvement is not insubstantial . . . .”

Don't Cage Our Oceans v. United States Army Corps of Engineers

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 30, 2024

Plaintiffs Have Standing to Challenge NWP 56. 17 In order to establish standing to sue under Article III of the Constitution, a plaintiff must 18 establish that it has “(1) suffered an injury … Plaintiffs have therefore sufficiently established 23 an injury in fact. See Friends of Santa Clara River v. U.S.

Julian David Palacios Obregon v. Todd Blanche

District Court, W.D. Washington · May 5, 2026

And he contends that NWIPC does not provide qualified 12 medical staff overnight. Id. at 2. Respondent filed a declaration by NWIPC’s clinic director, Dr. … “Whether civil detention is unconstitutionally punitive … is a question that 15 clearly sounds in habeas because it goes directly to the legality of the detention itself.”

Jimenez v. Rameau

District Court, W.D. Washington · Mar 13, 2025

The agreement lays out: “Customer 3 [Zero-Max] agrees that the trailer(s) will be operated by safe and careful drivers, properly 4 licensed, properly qualified (U.S.D.O.T. requirements), at least 21 years of age, who … Ed. 2d 714 (1989) (comparing sentencing guidelines to 7 discovery rules and other clearly procedural rules) (“These are substantive decisions, 8 fundamentally different from those governing the time for filing responsive

Metropolitan Group Property and Casualty Insurance Company v. Fite

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jun 27, 2024

The Court denied the motion, determining that: (1) there was a question of fact as to 1 whether Austin was a resident of the Brian and Tina’s household at the time of the accident and 2 therefore qualified as an insured … Metropolitan first says that Austin has not established a substantive bad-faith claim. Id. 4 at 14–15.

Jammeh v. HNN Associates LLC

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 9, 2020

Twenty-four of 10 those apartment communities accept only tenants qualified for the Low-Income Housing 11 Tax Credit (“LIHTC”) program. (See id. at 84:9-85:16.) … Cal. 2018) (“To be typical, a class representative need not 12 prove that she is immune from any possible defense . . . .

Khalid v. Microsoft Corporation

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 4, 2019

It is well-established that Section 1 of the Sherman Act does not reach “wholly 22 unilateral” conduct by a single entity. … By this point, at the very latest, Microsoft had clearly indicated 19 to Plaintiff its intention to deny the existence of the Exclusion List.

Franssen Condominium Association of Apartment Owners v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Company of Illinois

District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 18, 2022

Travelers does not contend that Johanson’s credentials or experience are 8 9 insufficient to qualify him as an expert. … Cook, 598 F.3d 558, 565 (9th Cir. 2010) (“Lack of certainty 15 16 is not, for a qualified expert, the same thing as guesswork.”).

Oppenheimer & Co Inc v. Mitchell

District Court, W.D. Washington · Mar 9, 2023

And where a lawsuit seeks declaratory or injunctive 18 relief, “it is well established that the amount in controversy is measured by the value of the 19 object of the litigation.” Hunt v. Wash. State Apple Advert. … “But, unlike the arbitrability of claims in general, whether the court or the arbitrator 14 decides arbitrability is an issue for judicial determination unless the parties clearly and 15 unmistakably provide otherwise

Canyon Park Business Center Owners' Association v. Buttigieg

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 25, 2023

Wash. 2012) (with regard to state claims, including 7 pursuant to SEPA, that are asserted in federal court, WSDOT and its Secretary have 8 Eleventh Amendment immunity). 9 … The Association has not 2 carried its “heavy burden” of establishing otherwise, and has therefore not proven that 3 WSDOT and/or the FHWA acted arbitrarily or capriciously in computing (or relying on) 4 LOS values

Cascade Forest Conservancy v. United States Forest Service

District Court, W.D. Washington · Dec 22, 2021

This qualifies as the “hard look” that NEPA requires. 16 b. … Plaintiffs clearly wish the Forest 22 Service had come to a different conclusion, but that is not at issue.

Cote v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 4, 2025

what portion of plaintiff’s pain and limitations the ALJ 12 erroneously attributed to DAA versus documented medical impairments. 13 Because the ALJ’s analysis does not identify evidence of malingering, is not qualified … AR 3294. 17 Playing video games and attending concerts are activities that do not clearly contradict 18 marked limitations in work-related

Drueding v. The Travelers Home and Marine Insurance Company

District Court, W.D. Washington · Nov 21, 2022

In addition, Travelers’ math establishes that Ms. 4 Drueding’s intermittent pro se status amounts to just 13 days total. Dkt. … Travelers must 7 clearly distinguish between the two sets of expenses and attorney fees.

Tisher

District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 13, 2026

Applying that reasoning here, Ford does not establish relatedness. … These contacts with Oregon may qualify as “consummating some transaction with the forum.” See Schwarzenegger, 374 F.3d at 802.

Montlake Community Club v. Mathis

District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 20, 2019

No. 33-13 at 56–58, 220) (maps clearly 25 indicating the Market property falling within the new limits of construction outlined in August and November 2016). … See Salmon River Concerned Citizens v. 15 Robertson, 32 F.3d 1346, 1359 (9th Cir. 1994) (“an agency must have discretion to rely on the 16 reasonable opinions of its own qualified experts even if . . . a court might find

Reald Spark, LLC v. Microsoft Corporation

District Court, W.D. Washington · May 8, 2023

The party seeking to compel discovery has the 12 burden of establishing that its requests are relevant. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1). … Ultimately, to prove its case, a plaintiff will have to “clearly refer to 10 tangible trade secret material.”

Bang v. Lacamas Shores Homeowners Association

District Court, W.D. Washington · Dec 18, 2023

by Plaintiff’s motion, the Court “is free to correct any errors or misunderstandings without having to find that its 22 prior decision was ‘clearly … Defendant claims that it is entitled to summary judgment in its favor, arguing 7 that the Plaintiff will be unable to establish several elements of his CWA claim.

Oatts

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jan 29, 2026

Any worker qualifying for the 13 exemption “must at least play a direct and ‘necessary role in the free flow of goods’ across 14 borders.” Id. at 458 (quoting Cir. City Stores, Inc. v. … Moreover, Section 1 of the 18 agreement clearly makes the agreement retroactive. (Id. at 15.) Accordingly, there is mutual 19 assent.

Freedom Foundation v. Department of Labor & Industries

District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 5, 2021

It is clear upon review of the record that Policy 5.04 is sufficiently definite and objective. 14 15 The Policy clearly … not demonstrate animus. 19 Based on the foregoing, Freedom Foundation has failed to establish