Case law

The Dentists Insurance Company v. Yousefian

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jun 21, 2023

Hartmann as a qualified expert witness is included his Declaration.” 11 Dkt. # 78 at 10. Plaintiff’s arguments are unavailing. … Additionally, the insured must establish it was harmed by the insurer’s bad 23 faith acts.

Saber Interactive Inc v. Oovee Ltd

District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 6, 2022

This shows that Oovee clearly indicates when a vehicle is licensed (like it did for the SHERP 20 vehicle). … Oovee cites cases stating 19 that a trademark is only entitled to protection in the geographic area in which it established a 20 secondary meaning. See Grupo Gigante S.A. de C.V. v.

Binford v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, W.D. Washington · Mar 31, 2021

Plaintiff 21 argues that because plaintiff eventually underwent surgery in 2015 (AR 1150-1151), the 22 District Court’s analysis was clearly erroneous. Dkt. 15, at 5. … The ALJ primarily 17 referred to plaintiff’s first year of treatment without considering subsequent records: for 18 example, the record cited by the ALJ establishes that plaintiff experienced temporary 19 pain relief

Lee v. Winborn

District Court, W.D. Washington · Mar 17, 2020

Rather, the County informed Lee her amended 14 application still did not qualify for a permit under the zoning codes. Lee decided to revise her 15 application. … relationship test. 8 The second element, as summarized in Woods View II, 9 requires that a direct inquiry is made by an individual and incorrect information is clearly

Yen

District Court, W.D. Washington · May 20, 2026

does not qualify for expansive protection given its status as a compilation setting forth 22 unprotectible information and its commonsense use of tabs and tables to organize the 23 information. … Three Boys, 212 F.3d at 486 (“By 20 establishing reasonable access and substantial similarity, a copyright plaintiff creates a 21 presumption of copying.” (citing Granite Music Corp. v.

Yohannes v. Olympic Collection Inc (OCI)

District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 11, 2019

“[T]o qualify for the bona fide error defense, the defendant must prove that (1) it 14 violated the FDCPA unintentionally; (2) the violation resulted … color of state law at the time the acts complained of were committed, and that 6 (2) the defendant deprived plaintiff of a right, privilege, or immunity

Phillips 66 Company v. Sacks

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 10, 2019

state a claim.”). 5 To help draw the line between jurisdictional issues and questions that go to the merits, the 6 Court articulated the following bright line rule: 7 If the Legislature clearly … Arbaugh, Leeson, and recent decisions from other circuits, at least one other court 4 in this circuit has considered whether Delaye is still good law and determined that “the 5 fact that the plan at issue is not ERISA qualifie

Courter v. CytoDyn Inc

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jun 25, 2025

(citing In re Immune Response Sec. Litig., 375 F. Supp. 2d 6 983, 1019 (S.D. … Amplifier, 191 F.3d 983, 997 (9th Cir.1999) (“[i]t is clearly 9 insufficient for plaintiffs to say that [a] later, sobering revelation[] makes[s] [an] earlier, 10 cheerier statement a falsehood”).

Seattle Times Co. v. Leathercare, Inc.

337 F. Supp. 3d 999 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 15, 2018

Words in a contract are assigned their reasonable, "ordinary, usual, and popular" meaning unless the agreement "clearly demonstrates a contrary intent." Id. at 504, 115 P.3d 262 . … (Jan. 31, 2018) at 12:23-13:7 (docket no. 268), is not sufficient to establish that Touchstone paid the markups at issue.

Wild Fish Conservancy v. Cooke Aquaculture Pacific, LLC

District Court, W.D. Washington · Nov 25, 2019

A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, 22 training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise … Accordingly, the Court begins and ends its 3 analysis with the plain language of the statute, which clearly permits prior-commenced citizen 4 suits to proceed notwithstanding a final order in a state-initiated administrative

Buffaloe v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 4, 2024

Settle’s previous 2011 and 2012 opinions, the Court Transcript Index (“CTI”) does not clearly label Dr. … The record established that 4 Plaintiff’s pain complaints were not infrequent or isolated but regularly occurred over many 5 years.

Familias Unidas Por La Justicia AFL-CIO v. United States Department of Labor

District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 19, 2025

It also does 15 not respond to Federal Defendants’ contention that “[t]he APA does not waive sovereign 16 immunity for cases asserting a violation of judicial mandates.” … Because Familias does not clearly differentiate between its challenge to DOL’s approval of 6 ESD’s methods and its challenge to DOL’s publication

Hopper v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, W.D. Washington · May 9, 2025

While Plaintiff reported that “[s]ince the pacemaker was implanted, she has done well and has had no recurrent arrhythmias to her knowledge” this statement is qualified by the context that 22 Plaintiff was currently … However, “[a] 7 specific finding of ambiguity or inadequacy of the record is not necessary to trigger this duty to 8 inquire, where the record establishes ambiguity or inadequacy.”

Pisciotti v. Brittingham

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 1, 2022

In her view, the evidence “clearly establishes” that she 5 and Gutierrez “were intimately involved in the creation of the subject (including kaleidoscope 6 object, position and speed), presentation (including camera … “Kaleidoscope” does not qualify as a work made for 7 hire under either of these “mutually exclusive” theories. Reid, 490 U.S. at 743. First, Brittingham 8 makes no effort to argue that Pisciotti was her employee.

Saber Interactive Inc v. Oovee Ltd

District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 30, 2022

Thus, “video games qualify for First Amendment 11 protection.” Id. Two years later, in Brown v. … Oovee cites cases stating 15 that a trademark is only entitled to protection in the geographic area in which it established a 16 secondary meaning. See Grupo Gigante S.A. de C.V. v.

Knapp v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, W.D. Washington · Feb 10, 2022

Hopfenbeck was fully qualified to assess IBS and its 17 interaction with emotional distress.” Dkt. 13, at 11. The Commissioner does not dispute that 18 Dr. … Further, these activities are not clearly transferable to a work setting.

Fessenden v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 3, 2024

the ALJ 3 failed to consider the evidence from nearly two years of the relevant DIB period from 4 December 2017-2019.16 5 As Plaintiff notes, the ALJ, however, clearly … Cal. 1 2008)) (“[A]s a lay person, an ALJ is ‘simply not qualified to interpret raw medical data in 2 functional terms.’”).

Campbell v. Yellen

District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 29, 2024

“Judgment on the 13 pleadings is proper when the moving party clearly establishes on the face of the pleadings that no 14 … In 1983, Girard was accepted into a Regional 21 Management Careers Program (RMCP), which created “a pool of well-qualified candidates who 22 have been recommended for management positions.” Id. at 1245.

PTP OneClick LLC v. Avalara Inc

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 27, 2019

63, 67 (1972)). 20 In cases involving software, the step one inquiry “often turns on whether the 21 claims focus on the specific asserted improvement in computer capabilities or, instead, on 22 a process that qualifies … Thus, the court cannot dismiss the complaint unless “[t]he facts 7 necessary to determine the applicability of the discovery rule . . . clearly appear on the 8 face of the complaint.” Id. Here, they do not.

Adamson v. Pierce County

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jun 30, 2023

In addition, several 19 Defendants were dismissed on immunity grounds. … More specifically, because the District Court found Defendants Pastor and 19 Bomkamp were not entitled to qualified immunity with respect to the First Amendment 20 retaliation claim and that the state law claims against