295 results for 'court:"USDC Central District of California"'.
J. Snyder enters findings of fact and conclusions of law that an LED module manufacturer has not shown that a competitor's infringement of its patent was willful. The manufacturer showed that the competitor infringed on its “Unified Driver and Light Source Assembly For Recessed Lighting” patent, and the court previously issued a preliminary injunction enjoining the competitor from making or selling the infringing versions of its light modules. The competitor changed its design immediately after receiving the cease-and-desist letter. "Nothing in the 12-day pre-suit notice period suggests willfulness."
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Snyder, Filed On: December 11, 2023, Case #: 2:18cv7090, NOS: Patent - Property Rights, Categories: Patent
J. Wu dismisses Playvuu's claims that the SnapChat app infringes on its patent. Playvuu's claimed method "for generating and sharing content is abstract because it describes using technology to automate a series of tasks by presenting information to a user and processing that information," which is patent ineligible. Playvuu has not pointed to any non-abstract features of the claimed method that would "present an avenue for a possible fact question concerning unconventionality."
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Wu, Filed On: December 8, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv6019, NOS: Patent - Property Rights, Categories: Patent
J. Slaughter grants Wells Fargo $10,700 in attorney fees for its complaint accusing Brian Lam, acting on behalf of himself and the investment advisory company, of not paying for his deposited demand drafts in his Wells Fargo account. The requested hourly rates for Wells Fargo's attorneys, which range from $145 to $408 an hour, are reasonable because each attorney has a relevant amount of experience and submits justified time entries.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Slaughter, Filed On: December 7, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv1277, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Attorney Fees, Contract
J. Wilson finds in favor of Lions Gate against the screenwriter's complaint accusing it of creating and airing a television show called "P-Valley" that infringed on the screenwriter's copyright for her musical stage play, "Soul Kittens Cabaret," as both works are about Black dancers working in a cabaret club. The idea for the play is not unique enough to make it a protected idea and there are no other substantial similarities between the two pieces of work.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Wilson, Filed On: December 7, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv2147, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: Copyright
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. Bernal finds in favor of the food company against the operations manager's complaint accusing it of conducting a wrongful investigation that led to his termination because he complained about its meal policy and because he is of Canadian origin. The operations manager did not exhaust administrative remedies regarding his July 2019 written warning and he does not offer any rebuttals to the warning itself. Furthermore, he does not establish sufficient evidence that his national origin was a factor in his firing.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Bernal, Filed On: December 7, 2023, Case #: 5:21cv1111, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, Employment Discrimination
J. Wu finds that the manufacturer demonstrates fair use of the automation company's copyrighted material, as the automation company originally disputed in its complaint that the manufacturer's products infringe on the automation company's M9-Series digital test instruments. The manufacturer's use of the copyright is transformative enough when compared to the original trademarked product, and the automation company does not make it clear what dispute is at issue regarding the code.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Wu, Filed On: December 6, 2023, Case #: 2:20cv2713, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Copyright, Trademark
J. Staton partially grants the consumer's motion for attorney fees following a settlement for her complaint accusing Mercedes-Benz of selling her an irreparably defective 2019 Mercedes-Benz GLC350E4, which had problems with the air conditioning system. The consumer's counsel receives a reduced hourly rate of $515 because his requested rate of $650 is higher than the average. The requested fees are also reduced due several excessive or duplicative time entries and block-billing, leaving the total award at $13,816.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Staton, Filed On: December 6, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv6032, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Warranty, Attorney Fees, Contract
J. Frimpong grants in part cross-motions in limine in a dispute between a wireless company and a city that denied the company's application to build a new stealth wireless communications facility to address an alleged coverage gap. The company alleges that the denial violates the Telecommunications Act. The city's expert "is a designated expert with appropriate credentials." Evidence of alternative technologies shall be permitted. The wireless company's expert shall be permitted to discuss the alleged coverage gap.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Frimpong, Filed On: December 5, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv1642, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Communications
J. Wright denies an individual's motion to dismiss a breach of contract claim brought against him by a cryptocurrency owner who alleges the individual did not make repayment agreement payments following the alleged theft of his cryptocurrency from a digital wallet. The individual who was holding the cryptocurrency agreed to pay in installments following the theft, but only made the first payment to the cryptocurrency owner. The cryptocurrency owner has sufficiently pleaded the existence of a valid contract.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Wright, Filed On: December 5, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv5607, NOS: Negotiable Instrument - Contract, Categories: Contract
J. Frimpong denies Target's and denies in part the county's motions for summary judgment in a civil rights suit brought by teenage shoppers who were detained after three men robbed a Target and fled. The teens allege they were wrongfully detained despite a store employee stating that they were not with the thieves. Store employees blockaded the exits, preventing the teens from leaving until the police arrived. The teens were detained by police, and released after deputies determined that they were not involved in the crime. A material dispute of fact exists regarding the teens' Unruh Act, Bane Act, Ralph Act, false imprisonment, negligence, defamation and excessive force claims. The deputies are not entitled to qualified immunity.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Frimpong, Filed On: December 1, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv1237, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights
J. Frimpong denies an insurance company's motion for summary judgment regarding an insured's allegations that the insurer wrongfully denied his property damage claim after a reverse osmosis system failed and water flooded the kitchen. There is a genuine issue of fact regarding whether the wear and tear exclusion or water exclusion apply, and whether the insurer acted reasonably. The insurer has not shown that the loss is entirely excluded under the policy. The insured's breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing claims continue.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Frimpong, Filed On: November 30, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv9261, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance
J. Staton affirms the bankruptcy court's order denying attorney fees but reverses its order denying costs, awarding $11,032 to the debtor. The bankruptcy court determined that there was no prevailing party in the matter, and the debtor appealed. The "definition of prevailing party for purposes of costs is different than that used for attorney’s fees." The bankruptcy court applied the correct legal standard for determining attorney fees but lacked discretion to deny the debtor "prevailing party" status regarding costs.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Staton, Filed On: November 28, 2023, Case #: 5:23cv301, NOS: Bankruptcy Appeal 28 USC 158 - Bankruptcy, Categories: Bankruptcy
J. Staton partially grants the consumers' motion for attorney fees for their complaint asserting that Mercedes-Benz USA sold them a vehicle with serious defects, including “powertrain system defects, engine defects and other serious nonconformities.” The consumers' counsel submits reasonably detailed billing records for 30.7 attorney hours for three attorneys, but their claim that their possibly delayed time spent on a $59,000 settlement offer does not justify the costs incurred after Jul. 10, 2023, when MBUSA removed this case to federal court.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Staton, Filed On: November 28, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv5532, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Settlements, Attorney Fees, Contract
J. Hsu grants an employer's motion to dismiss an employee's allegations of disability discrimination and wrongful termination. The employee suffered a ruptured brain aneurysm and had surgery and was hospitalized. She alleges that she returned to work but continued to suffer symptoms, and after requesting medical leave, she was fired. The employee has not shown that she is “a qualified individual eligible for FEHA’s protections" as she has not shown that she was able to perform her essential duties with or without reasonable accommodations. The employee is granted leave to amend.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Hsu, Filed On: November 27, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv5906, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, Employment Discrimination
J. Bernal finds, based on findings of fact and conclusions of law, that the parent has not shown that an administrative law judge's factual findings regarding her child's special education needs were erroneous or that any issues in the Office of Administrative Hearings' decision were time-barred. The parent sought partial reversal of the Office of Administrative Hearings' findings that her child was not eligible for special education and related services after June 30, 2017 and was not entitled to a free appropriate public education from the school district. The administrative law judge found that the parent refused to consent to the school district's assessment plans for the student.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Bernal, Filed On: November 22, 2023, Case #: 5:21cv326, NOS: Amer w/Disabilities - Other - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Education
J. Olguin grants final approval of a $190,000 settlement in the hourly non-exempt driver's class action alleging that the distribution company did not pay him and other drivers their owed minimum wage, authorize pay for their meal and rest periods, or timely pay all earned wages. The settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Olguin, Filed On: November 22, 2023, Case #: 2:20cv11169, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, Settlements, Class Action
J. Frimpong denies in part a comic book co-creator and writer's motion for summary judgment regarding a colorist's allegations of copyright infringement. The colorist alleges that he is a co-writer of the comic book "Invincible," that he owns a portion of the copyright, and that he is owed royalties on derivative works based on "Invincible." The statute of limitations bars the colorist's copyright and fraud claims, but a factual dispute exists regarding the initial agreement and the colorist's compensation. Neither the breach of contract claim nor the claims for declaratory relief as to the Certificate of Authorship are time-barred. The colorist "seeks either to invalidate the Certificate of Authorship on the basis that it lacked consideration or to clarify the meaning and scope of the Certificate of Authorship and oral contract."
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Frimpong, Filed On: November 22, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv180, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: Copyright, Fraud, Contract
J. Kronstadt grants final approval to a settlement that will bring an end to the consumer's class action accusing the debt collection company of sending him a notice of its intent to sell his repossessed vehicle without the required advanced notice and without several other disclosures, and then improperly demanding that the consumer pay the difference between the amount due under the sales contract and the amount received at the sale of the repossessed vehicle. Under the settlement agreement, the company will issue refund checks to class members who paid any amount of their deficiency balances and will waive the remaining deficiency balances of all class members. Class counsel is entitled to an award of $60,000 in fees.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Kronstadt, Filed On: November 21, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv6376, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Debt Collection, Settlements, Class Action
J. Klausner dismisses the California State University professors' complaint accusing the CSU chancellor and others of implementing a policy that discriminated against members of the Indian and South Asian communities and those who practiced Hinduism. The professors claim that the policy violates due process because it uses the word "caste" without providing a definition and thus allows vague usage. However, the anti-discrimination policy is meant to shield religion from discrimination, and they do not show that they face a credible threat of persecution from this policy despite being Hindu practitioners for the duration of their employment.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Klausner, Filed On: November 21, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv7550, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Employment, Due Process
J. Selna awards the cigarillo company $10.2 million in attorney fees and $613,100 in disbursements for its complaint that the tobacco company violated various federal and state competition laws and breached the private label agreements between the two parties. The cigarillo company cites reasonable hours to justify the award, but it also cites excludable clerical work and other worked hours, so not all requested hours are accepted.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Selna, Filed On: November 17, 2023, Case #: 8:14cv1664, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: Antitrust, Attorney Fees, Contract
J. Wu grants the government's motion to exclude improperly disclosed witnesses and limit the testimony of certain witnesses in the driver's lawsuit alleging that a U.S. Postal Service mail-delivery truck driver negligently merged into the driver's lane, causing a collision. Among other errors, the driver does not provide proper expert disclosures for her non-retained treating physicians, and she does not provide a summary of facts as to how these individuals would testify about her injuries.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Wu, Filed On: November 17, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv3290, NOS: Motor Vehicle - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Vehicle, Experts, Discovery
J. Wright denies a company's motion to dismiss consumers' class action alleging violations of false advertising laws "by misleading consumers with deceptive advertisements featuring falsely discounted home organization products." The consumers have standing, have asserted a cause of action for Consumer Legal Remedies Act violations and have sufficiently alleged breach of contract and breach of express warranty claims.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Wright, Filed On: November 16, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv2218, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Contract, False Advertising
J. Snyder denies a marketing company's motion to dismiss Volkswagen's breach of contract claims. Volkswagen alleges that the marketing company failed to indemnify and defend it in an underlying suit where a consumer alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act based on telephone calls and voicemail messages. The standard terms and conditions of the agreement apply and the indemnity provision may be triggered without finding that the marketing company breached its contractual obligations. Volkswagen has stated a plausible claim for equitable indemnity.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Snyder, Filed On: November 15, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv6599, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Contract
J. Bernal denies General Motors' motion to dismiss a consumer's allegations that GM falsely claimed the Chevrolet Bolt was safe and functional, when they knew of battery defects that led to a recall notice "stating that its batteries may ignite when nearing a full charge" and warning that mileage should not fall below 70 miles remaining and the vehicle should not be parked indoors overnight due to battery defects. The consumer alleges that GM had a duty to disclose that the battery was unsafe at the time of purchase and that if he had known of these defects, he would not have bought the car. The consumer is granted leave to amend his fraud claims, therefore GM's motion to dismiss is denied as moot.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Bernal, Filed On: November 15, 2023, Case #: 5:23cv1715, NOS: Motor Vehicle Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Product Liability
J. Garnett grants in part unhoused individuals' and a grassroots organization's motion for preliminary injunction enjoining the city from seizing and discarding or destroying the possessions of unhoused individuals. The individuals allege that during sweeps, city workers throw all property into a dumpster, then remove the dumpster without giving individuals a chance to retrieve their belongings, however the city's stated procedure is to give notice prior to sweeps, and not to destroy belongings, but to store them so that they can be retrieved later. The individuals have shown they are likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that giving individuals only two days to retrieve their belongings violates the Fourteenth Amendment. The city may continue abatement efforts, but it must comply with the city's stated policies, including allowing individuals 90 days to retrieve belongings.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Garnett, Filed On: November 14, 2023, Case #: 5:23cv1536, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights
J. Wright denies a toy company's motion to dismiss a putative class action alleging unjust enrichment and violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law. The class alleges that the toy company markets and sells toys that have small parts that violate the Small Parts regulation and therefore are banned hazardous substances in violation of the the Federal Hazardous Substances Act. The class has sufficiently alleged that the toys, marketed to children under the age of three, contain small parts that violate the Small Parts rule.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Wright, Filed On: November 13, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv2567, NOS: Personal Injury - Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Product Liability