295 results for 'court:"USDC Central District of California"'.
J. Wright grants an airline's motion to stay a wage and hour class action pending resolution of an earlier-filed employment class action in USDC Southern District of California of similarly situated employees. There is substantial similarity between the issues and parties of the first action filed, therefore the first-to-file rule applies. A venue transfer would be inappropriate. Continuing the discovery process solely for the retaliation claims "would require duplicative discovery and pose the risk of conflicting judgments."
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Wright, Filed On: February 28, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv8742, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, Class Action
J. Kato grants default judgment to the streetwear company for its complaint that the manufacturer manufactured products bearing marks confusingly similar to the streetwear company's "Sp5der" mark. The streetwear company sufficiently alleges its claims for trademark counterfeiting and infringement of its registered trademarks, because the manufacturer's products are nearly identical to the streetwear company's and are likely to cause consumer confusion.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Kato, Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv3327, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Trademark
J. Wilson grants the SEC's motion for monetary remedies and injunctive relief for its complaint that the company owner engaged in a fraudulent investment scheme by hiding his criminal history from investors, combining personal and investment funds, misrepresenting his returns, and buying property with investment funds. The SEC shows that the company owner is likely to commit fraud in the future, because he defrauded multiple investors over several years and there is evidence that he is still soliciting victims during this case.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Wilson, Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: 8:19cv1174, NOS: Securities/Commodities/Exchange - Other Suits, Categories: Fraud, Securities, Injunction
J. Carter dismisses the parent's federal claims alleging that the school district's staff retaliated against the child, then a first grader, for drawing a picture with the phrase "Black Lives Matter" in black marker and "any life" beneath that sentence in lighter marker before sharing it with a classmate. The federal claims are dismissed because discipline about what is appropriate to say or do in school belongs in the hands of teachers instead of federal courts, and the parent's two other claims arise under California law.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Carter, Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: 8:23cv306, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Education, Jurisdiction
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Hsu grants final approval of a class action settlement and grants approval of attorney fees and costs in a suit brought by actors who worked as a background or stand-in actor on television shows produced by CBS or Eye Productions and filmed in New York or California between March 30, 2014 and October 22, 2022. The all-inclusive gross settlement amount of $4 million and $1,333,333 in attorney fees are fair and reasonable.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Hsu, Filed On: February 21, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv2965, NOS: Fair Labor Standards Act - Labor, Categories: Class Action, Labor
J. Holcomb denies in part the government's motion to dismiss a son's allegations of both negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress after his father, an immigration detainee, died due to complications from Covid-19 while in ICE custody. "The conduct at issue is not the type that is generally shielded by the discretionary function." The government was required to assess whether the father could potentially be released after he contracted Covid-19. The portions of the son's claims which center on the ICE's concealment of the seriousness of his father's condition and subsequent death continue.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Holcomb, Filed On: February 21, 2024, Case #: 5:23cv380, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Tort, Covid-19
J. Wright grants an individual's motion to set aside default and grants in part a perishable agricultural commodities company's motion for default judgment. The company alleges that the buyer has not paid invoices. The individual alleges that he was not properly served and the company has not shown that the individual acted in bad faith. The company's motion for default judgment against the individual is denied as moot. The company alleges that it sold and shipped perishable agricultural commodities to the buyer, and its motion for default judgment is granted on the claims that have been adequately alleged.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Wright, Filed On: February 20, 2024, Case #: 8:23cv410, NOS: Agricultural Acts - Other Suits, Categories: Agriculture, Contract
J. Snyder grants an individual's motion to set aside default judgment against him for failure to appear at a court-ordered hearing. The individual was ordered to pay $1.6 million in damages. The individual claims that he was not aware that the case had been continuing without his participation and without any attorneys representing him, and therefore the default judgment is void. There is no evidence in the record that a meaningful effort was made to locate the individual to serve him, beyond publishing notice in a newspaper in Los Angeles despite knowing that the individual did not reside in California.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Snyder, Filed On: February 20, 2024, Case #: 2:16cv6196, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Tort
J. Wright grants a roofing company's motion to set aside default and denies a construction company's motion for default judgment in a contract dispute. The construction company alleges that the roofing company performed defective work in a construction project for an arts and recreation center. The construction company terminated the contract and hired a third party to complete the roof. The roofing company has said that its delay in responding was due to a clerical error and that it is interested in working toward a resolution or settlement in the matter. The construction company's motion for default judgment is denied for the same reasons as its first order denying the same request; the construction company has not provided any further specific context in its renewed motion.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Wright, Filed On: February 20, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv3432, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Contract
J. Gee grants police officers' motion for summary judgment regarding an individual's allegations of unreasonable search and seizure and violation of his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights stemming from his arrest following a traffic stop. Officers saw a bottle of codeine in plain view, found methamphetamine paraphernalia in the vehicle and used force to handcuff the individual, who the claim resisted arrest. The officers had probable cause to initiate the traffic stop and the search of the vehicle was not unconstitutional. A reasonable juror could find that an officer's use of a taser on constituted excessive force. The officer is entitled to qualified immunity.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Gee, Filed On: February 19, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv4909, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights
J. Gutierrez grants an insurance company's motion in limine in an insurance coverage dispute over groundwater contamination. The county asserts there were 18 separate occurrences that caused groundwater contamination. The insurer seeks to preclude the county from offering evidence relating to the county's claim for future policy benefits. The county "fails to provide...reasons for how its untimely disclosures were substantially justified and harmless." The county is precluded "from offering evidence or argument regarding its damages claim for future policy benefits."
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Gutierrez, Filed On: February 14, 2024, Case #: 5:21cv1978, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance
J. Walter affirms the bankruptcy court’s decision on a lender's motion for judgment on the pleadings regarding a property that the debtor alleges his stepfather transferred to him. The stepfather's loan was secured by a second deed of trust against the property. After a decade-long default on the loan, a trustee's sale was held. The bankruptcy court did not err when it concluded that the debtor's wrongful foreclosure claim was barred by the doctrine of res judicata.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Walter, Filed On: February 13, 2024, Case #: 8:23cv19, NOS: Bankruptcy Appeal 28 USC 158 - Bankruptcy, Categories: Bankruptcy
J. Frimpong grants in part a motion for monetary sanctions in the amount of $149,787 against an importer and its counsel for causing a mistrial in a trade secrets suit against former employees who formed a competitive business. The importer's counsel asked one of the former employees a question concerning a settlement communication during the trial, which "fairly well and truly tainted" the jury. The judge granted the motion for mistrial, recused himself, and the case was transferred to another judge. The judge properly exercised his discretion in granting a mistrial. He held a hearing with the parties and considered their arguments prior to granting the mistrial.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Frimpong, Filed On: February 6, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv2120, NOS: Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) - Property Rights, Categories: Sanctions, Trade Secrets
J. Blumenfeld Jr. grants the driver $1 million in attorney fees after a jury awarded him $150,000 on his claim that the city's police officers used excessive force when they pointed their guns on him as he lay prone on the ground and complied with all orders. The driver requests $1.3 million in attorney fees, but he asks for the higher end of the hourly rate range for one of his attorneys which is not justified, so the amount is reduced accordingly.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Blumenfeld Jr., Filed On: February 5, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv2640, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Attorney Fees
J. Aenlle-Rocha denies the PPE company summary judgment against the contract claim in the distribution service's lawsuit asserting that the PPE company must pay for one million KN95 face masks delivered during the Covid-19 pandemic, which were destroyed in a warehouse fire while the parties argued over the shipping method. The PPE company argues that the order was invalid because it did not contain material terms besides the quantity, description and price per mask, but there is currently no evidence that negates the parties' intent to enter the agreement. Until such evidence arises, the purchase order qualifies as a binding agreement.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Aenlle-Rocha, Filed On: February 2, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv8369, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Evidence, Covid-19, Contract
J. Hsu denies a family's motion for permanent injunction preventing further discrimination but grants in part their fee award regarding allegations that the military did not provide their daughter with a reasonable accommodation for her learning disability. "The Court is loath to impede on military operations by requiring an equitable remedy that exceeds the harm the jury found in this case." After a reduction in hours and hourly rate, a fee award of $351,780 and costs of $22,029 are granted.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Hsu, Filed On: February 1, 2024, Case #: 5:22cv931, NOS: Housing/Accommodations - Civil Rights, Categories: Housing
J. Aenlle-Rocha partially grants the consumer's motion for attorney fees after she settled her warranty and fraud claims against Ford Motor regarding her purchase of a used 2017 Ford F-150 Raptor vehicle. The consumer seeks $83,100 in attorney fees but the submitted hourly rates do not match the rates in similar cases and some travel entries are not justified, so the consumer receives $61,400 in attorney fees.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Aenlle-Rocha, Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: 2:21cv8867, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Fraud, Warranty, Attorney Fees
J. Aenlle-Rocha finds in favor of the insurance company against the motorcyclist's complaint that it unreasonably refused to accept the offer in his July 2015 demand letter, which asserted that the motorcyclist suffered injuries in an accident with the insurance company's insured driver that cost him "over a million dollars" in medical bills. Although the motorcyclist's demand could be read as reasonable, the insurance company's rejection of the demand letter was also reasonable because there is no evidence that it received corroborating documentation quantifying the motorcyclist's injuries, and its investigation was reasonable.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Aenlle-Rocha, Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: 5:22cv125, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, Contract
J. Kato finds that the insurance company is allowed to rescind its policies from the commercial real estate agency because of the latter's misrepresentations on the application for coverage. The real estate agency lied when it answered a question asking if it had litigation involving employment, third-party discrimination or third-party harassment within the last five years of applying for coverage. The insurance company would not have issued the policies to the agency had it provided a truthful answer.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Kato, Filed On: January 30, 2024, Case #: 8:23cv1016, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, Contract
J. Kato finds in favor of the payroll services provider against the female manager's complaint alleging that it gave its male employees higher salaries and promotions than its female employees. Although the manager identifies three male comparators, she does not present admissible evidence regarding their salaries, nor does she present sufficient evidence that would let a jury conclude that the payroll services provider paid male employees more than female employees for the same work.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Kato, Filed On: January 30, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv2583, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, Employment Discrimination
J. Wright grants a broker-dealer's motion to dismiss a contract dispute with an asset management company. The company and broker entered into a deal where the broker would introduce investors to the management company in exchange for a solicitation fee. The broker alleges that the management company did not pay the fee, rendering the agreement unlawful and void. The management company seeks a judicial declaration that it has no contractual obligation to pay the broker the solicitation fees and that federal securities laws prohibit the payment of such fees. The management company "has needlessly multiplied this litigation vexatiously by removing the First Action, not defending it, removing the Second Action, and then filing a third separate action rather than asserting counterclaims in the Second Action."
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Wright, Filed On: January 30, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv4483, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Contract
J. Fitzgerald reverses in part a dismissal order regarding a law firm which obtained attorney fee awards and subsequent costs related to appeals against an estate trustee for bringing meritless claims against the firm. The firm alleged that the trustee failed to demand that the debtor turn over rents collected on two properties. The bankruptcy court erred in finding that the firm's breach of fiduciary duty claim was time-barred but was correct in finding that the trustee had quasi-judicial immunity.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Fitzgerald, Filed On: January 29, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv4450, NOS: Bankruptcy Appeal 28 USC 158 - Bankruptcy, Categories: Bankruptcy
J. Scarsi grants an insurance company's motion to dismiss an insured's claims of breach of contract and elder abuse for not receiving benefits that he alleges he is due under his insurance policy. The insured has not exhausted Medicare’s administrative review procedures for his breach of contract or breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing claims. The insured is granted leave to amend his elder neglect claim.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Scarsi, Filed On: January 24, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv6324, NOS: Medicare Act - Contract, Categories: Insurance, Medicare, Contract
J. Pregerson denies in part California Highway Patrol officers' motion to dismiss a driver's allegations of excessive force, malicious prosecution and deliberate indifference to medical needs after he was pulled over and arrested for driving under the influence despite allegedly passing several field sobriety tests and agreeing to a breath test which was not administered. All charges against the driver were dropped following a blood test. The driver alleges he was thrown to the ground without cause, suffering a torn rotator cuff, shoulder injuries and back injuries. The officers are not entitled to qualified immunity on the excessive force claim. The officers withdrew their request to dismiss the malicious prosecution claim.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Pregerson, Filed On: January 24, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv5926, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights
J. Carter denies the lawn games manufacturer's motion to exclude the mischaracterization of its trade dress, which concerns the lawn games manufacturer's lawsuit that the outdoor games products company's TP White Connect 4 game infringes the lawn games manufacturer's Four In a Row game. The outdoor games company present facts that sufficiently question the functionality of elements of the lawn games manufacturer's definition of its trade dress.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Carter, Filed On: January 24, 2024, Case #: 8:19cv523, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Evidence, Trademark
J. Carney grants the delivery driver's counsel $191,300 in attorney fees for representing the delivery driver in his class action accusing the landscape supply company of not paying him and other employees their overtime wages, bonuses, incentives and commissions. The delivery driver's counsel requests attorney fees equal to one-third of the gross settlement amount, or approximately $266,600, but while the counsel performed adequately, they did not perform exceptionally in the straightforward wage violation case.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Carney, Filed On: January 22, 2024, Case #: 8:21cv1834, NOS: Other Labor Litigation - Labor, Categories: Settlements, Attorney Fees, Class Action