195 results for 'court:"USDC Oregon"'.
J. Hallman awards the insureds $142,600 in attorney fees for their lawsuit alleging that the insurance company was obligated to pay the insureds $275,000 in structural benefits, $220,000 in personal property benefits and $50,000 in temporary living benefits after a fire damaged their homes. Although seven hours of an attorney's travel are omitted because his full rate of traveling a good portion of the state would be excessive, there is no evidence to suggest that the hours were otherwise duplicated or excessive. The attorneys' hourly rates are fair because they are in between the mean and 95th percentile for counsel of their qualifications.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Hallman, Filed On: June 14, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv119, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, Property, Attorney Fees
J. Beckerman partially grants the business management consultant's motion to vacate a default judgment in favor of the engineering services company for its claim that the consultant infringes on the engineering company's trademark. The record suggests that the consultant did not receive notice of the action until after default judgment was entered, at which point it appeared. As such, the engineering company's post-judgment requests for attorney fees and bill of costs are denied.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Beckerman, Filed On: June 13, 2023, Case #: 3:21cv1584, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Trademark, Attorney Fees
J. McShane dismisses the business partner's unfair competition counterclaim that the boba tea shop owner breached his duty of loyalty when he opened another store about five miles away from the business partner's shop, thus harming the latter's business. The boba tea shop owner's son is the registered owner and has no duty of loyalty, and the business partner does not present facts supporting the argument that the boba tea shop owner acted as an agent of both businesses with conflicting interests.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: McShane, Filed On: June 12, 2023, Case #: 6:22cv1488, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Trademark, Unfair Competition, Business Practices
J. Russo finds in favor of the senior housing and memory care facility on the former supervisor's claim that its executive director fired her because of her Spondylolisthesis, a spinal disorder in which misaligned vertebra cause pain. The decision to fire the supervisor was singularly the facility executive director's decision, which was based on information that was independently corroborated by third parties. The fact that the director was the one who directly hired the supervisor despite already knowing about her back impairment "strongly undermines any inference of discriminatory animus toward plaintiff based on her disability."
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Russo, Filed On: June 2, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv465, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, Employment Discrimination
J. Kasubhai dismisses the adhesive manufacturing company's invalidity expert from the software company's lawsuit, which alleges that the adhesive manufacturing company copied the protected design of the software company's patent for its serial number encoder, as the patent partially relates to systems for encoded and commissioned wireless radio frequency identification (RFID) devices. The expert's opinions that the patent claims are invalid because they do not comply with the "RFID for Dummies" patentability conditions are too conclusory to be valuable to the jury, because the expert does not analyze how each of the "RFID for Dummies" disclosures specifically explains the claim limitations to which they are meant to correspond.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Kasubhai, Filed On: June 2, 2023, Case #: 6:17cv1685, NOS: Patent - Property Rights, Categories: Jury, Patent, Experts
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. Aiken finds that young climate activists can amend their lawsuit accusing the government of subjecting them and future generations to the devastating effects of climate change. The declaratory relief the youths seek – a declaration that the federal government’s energy policies violate the youths’ constitutional rights to substantive due process and equal protection of the law – “is squarely within the constitutional and statutory power of Article III courts to grant.”
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Aiken, Filed On: June 1, 2023, Case #: 6:15cv1517, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Constitution, Environment, Government
J. Immergut dismisses with prejudice the committee administrator's lawsuit alleging that the members of the Oregon State Bar Board of Bar Examiners abused their positions to initiate joint public corruption investigations against the committee administrator on behalf of oil companies that opposed Senate Bill 664 that the committee administrator supported in 1987. The committee administrator's federal claims are time-barred because they all stem from the 1987 public corruption investigations. While he claims damages for the last 30 years, he does not prove how this is relevant within the four-year statute of limitations, nor does he come up with a justification to overlook how he did not discover his initial injuries until after the original statute of limitations.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Immergut, Filed On: May 31, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv1959, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Fraud, Racketeering
J. You grants the business entity's counsel $15,000 in attorney fees in relation to the author's dismissed claim that the owners of the business took ideas from the author's book "Why God Doesn't Exist," and used them for their website, YouTube videos and podcasts. The author's copyright claims were "objectively unreasonable, if not frivolous" and the counsel for the owners, at a reasonable rate and reasonable hours, won so successfully that the author's claims were dismissed with prejudice.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: You, Filed On: May 31, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv380, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: Copyright, Attorney Fees
J. Immergut finds that neither party is entitled to summary judgment in a lawsuit challenging Oregon Ballot Measure 114’s restrictions on large-capacity magazines as unconstitutional. This case “implicates complex issues of fact, ranging from the historical uses and prevalence of certain weapons to the functional similarities between the earliest firearms capable of firing more than 10 rounds of ammunition without reloading and the LCMs of modern-day use.” The case also involves “important and unsettled questions of law,” which are “more properly reached after the benefit of a full trial rather than on a motion for summary judgment.”
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Immergut, Filed On: May 26, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv1815, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Constitution, Firearms
J. McShane dismisses the former manufacturing technician's claims that the manufacturing company wrongfully fired her because it did not want to provide accommodations for her cataract and dry eye condition. Most of the former technician's claims prior to Apr. 25, 2018, are time-barred. As for the remaining disparate treatment claims, she does not present evidence that the manufacturing company reduced her pay and benefits or that it significantly changed her duties, and it had a reasonable cause to dismiss her due to her disrespect toward co-workers.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: McShane, Filed On: May 25, 2023, Case #: 6:20cv1201, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Employment, Employment Discrimination
J. McShane denies summary judgment to the department of corrections for the corrections officer's claim that another officer sexually assaulted her, leading her to resign when rumors circulated that she consensually slept with the other officer to advance her career. A jury could reasonably assume that the corrections officer's co-workers retaliated against her for filing her complaint because the rumors and hostile work environment happened on a regular basis for nearly a year, to the point that she had to take leave multiple times to handle her anxiety and panic attacks, and the department of corrections' refusal to investigate the rumors could be construed as retaliation.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: McShane, Filed On: May 23, 2023, Case #: 6:21cv1267, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment Discrimination, Whistleblowers, Employment Retaliation
J. Simon grants the Scappoose city councilor's motion for a preliminary injunction to stop the supervisors from banning him from attending in-person meetings for the Columbia 9-1-1 Communications District. The supervisors claim they banned the councilor due to his inappropriate texts and behavior. However, there are doubts that the supervisors' actions were a prompt corrective remedial action because there is evidence that they knew about the complaints against the councilor since February 2020, but the ban took place in February 2023. The only evidence of this inappropriate behavior is the contradictory declarations of his fellow employees.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Simon, Filed On: May 18, 2023, Case #: 3:23cv293, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Municipal Law, Injunction
J. Simon declines to strike the consumer's contract claim alleging that the credit union did not credit her account for stolen funds. The credit union does not prove that the consumer concedes that it performed an adequate investigation of the stolen funds because its assertion is based on a line that it did not investigate the error claim "beyond a determination" that a fraudster inducted the consumer to provide them access.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Simon, Filed On: May 18, 2023, Case #: 3:21cv847, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Fraud, Banking / Lending, Class Action
J. Simon partially grants the shareholders of Apex leave to file a second amended complaint to add Apex as a plaintiff and to add claims for bad faith and fraud, as the shareholders allege that the semiconductor manufacturing company did not inform the shareholders of the export-controlled status of integrated circuits, particularly two models of integrated circuits, that required special permits and that were ultimately seized by Canadian border authorities in December 2008. The semiconductor manufacturing company contends that the bad faith claim is time-barred because it is based on Apex's purchased orders placed on Dec. 10, 2008, and the lawsuit was filed on Dec. 18, 2018. However, Apex seeks economic losses, which are not time-barred.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Simon, Filed On: May 17, 2023, Case #: 3:19cv86, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Evidence, Fraud
J. Simon grants a protective order to Western University of Health Science and the Samaritan defendants for the doctor's 103 identical requests for admission (RFA), as part of the doctor's complaint alleging that the hospital at which he was a resident unreasonably fired him under the false accusation that he conspired with another doctor to harm the reputation of a third doctor. The RFAs are excessive because they contain several hundred questions, so they are limited to 35 single RFAs. The doctor may request more RFAs if he can show that the 35 questions created to comply with this ruling are insufficient.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Simon, Filed On: May 15, 2023, Case #: 3:16cv1494, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Employment, Fiduciary Duty, Discovery