276 results for 'court:"USDC Northern District of California"'.
J. Chen grants the mail-order prescription program participants' motion to amend their complaint to add a new plaintiff following the death of three plaintiffs and dismissal of one for failure to prosecute, and denies the program administrators' motion to dismiss. The amendments are neither untimely nor futile, and the administrators have not sufficiently alleged that they were prejudiced by alleged delay. The administrators' arguments that the new plaintiff's letters to them failed to alert them to a serious issue with patients' access to HIV medication are insufficient to warrant dismissal of his claims for lack of notice without further information on the contents of the plaintiffs' claimed notice.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Chen, Filed On: July 28, 2023, Case #: 3:18cv1031, NOS: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) - Labor, Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, Class Action
J. Seeborg denies both the LED holder manufacturer and its customer's motions to exclude each other's expert witnesses, an accountant and the manufacturer's president. The accountant's methodology for calculating damages is not so irrelevant or unreliable as to require exclusion, and questions about the accuracy and appropriateness of certain figures used in his report are better left for trial. That accountant's opinion as to whether or not the parties' agreement's liquidated damages terms are reasonable is also admissible. The president, meanwhile, has offered testimony that falls within his personal experience and knowledge, and need not include a written report with his expert disclosure. Disputes over the figures he uses are similarly better evaluated at trial, and while his rebuttal report improperly provides legal conclusions, they do not justify wholesale exclusion of the report.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Seeborg, Filed On: July 28, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv1886, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Experts, Contract
J. Illston partially grants the amputee prisoner's motion for attorneys' fees and costs in his successful civil rights suit arising from his forcible extraction from his cell without his wheelchair. Deductions and reductions are made to the lodestar totaling 5.3 hours, and to the total hours claimed totaling 382.78 hours. 25% of the prisoner's compensatory damages award must also be used to pay a portion of the fee award attributable to the prisoner's successful civil rights claim. A 1.6 multiplier to the lodestar is appropriate because of "the extraordinary results achieved" and the need to attract counsel to meritorious prisoners' rights cases.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Illston, Filed On: July 28, 2023, Case #: 3:18cv1245, NOS: Prison Condition - Habeas Corpus, Categories: Attorney Fees, Prisoners' Rights
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. Chen finds that the copyright plaintiff's cartoons and the characters in them are entitled to "thick" or "broad" copyright protection, under which a jury must find protectable elements of works to be "substantially similar" to the copyrighted work to support a finding of copyright infringement, rather than "virtually identical." While the range of expression of baby cartoon characters, which feature prominently in cartoons, is narrow as compared to some other characters, there remain a broad array of ways in which a cartoon baby could be made distinct from other cartoon babies.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Chen, Filed On: July 26, 2023, Case #: 3:21cv6536, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: Copyright, Jury
J. Ryu partially grants the employer's motion to dismiss the employee's suit asserting defamation, invasion of privacy and related claims. The invasion of privacy claim is dismissed with leave to amend, since it is not clearly pleaded and cites a "constitutional right to privacy," to which she is not entitled as a non-resident of California. An anti-SLAPP motion seeking dismissal of claims under a non-disparagement section of the California Labor Code and for defamation fails.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Ryu, Filed On: July 26, 2023, Case #: 4:23cv476, NOS: Assault, Libel, & Slander - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Employment, Defamation, Privacy
J. Hamilton partially grants the prison officials' motion for summary judgment in the prisoner's suit alleging that they retaliated against him for filing inmate appeals. The officials have demonstrated that there are no issues of material fact regarding incidents in 2019, but not regarding one prison guard's alleged involvement in a subsequent 2020 incident. Taking the prisoner's claims as true, the guard also would not be entitled to qualified immunity for that incident. The prisoner's motion to compel is denied, however, and he is referred to a pro se mediation program.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Hamilton, Filed On: July 26, 2023, Case #: 4:20cv3128, NOS: Prison Condition - Habeas Corpus, Categories: Civil Rights, Prisoners' Rights
J. White denies wholesaler and its officers' motion for a new trial on the shareholder's intentional-misrepresentation and breach of fiduciary duty claims against them, and conditionally denies the motions for a new trial on a breach of contract claim and a punitive damages claim. The award of punitive damages is excessive, and so is remitted to the nominal amount of one dollar. Breach of contract damages are also excessive, and are remitted to to the amount of $17,099 rather than the original amount of $886,951.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: White, Filed On: July 26, 2023, Case #: 4:19cv2534, NOS: Other Fraud - Torts - Personal Property, Categories: Damages, Fiduciary Duty, Contract
J. White partially grants the shareholder's motion for an award of attorney fees and costs in his suit against the wholesaler and its officials alleging underpayment of distributions and undervaluing of the shareholder's stock. The shareholder is entitled to attorney fees, costs and expenses for his breach of contract claim, but not for his tort claims. An employee who signed a personal guarantee is also liable for these attorney fees.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: White, Filed On: July 26, 2023, Case #: 4:19cv2534, NOS: Other Fraud - Torts - Personal Property, Categories: Fraud, Attorney Fees
J. Chesney largely denies the canned fruit seller's motion to dismiss the consumer's suit alleging that fruit cups with the phrase "fruit naturals" on the label misled her into believing that the cups contained only natural ingredients. The consumer has sufficiently pled an injury in fact or causation, but lacks standing to seek injunctive relief and to bring claims under the laws of states other than California and Oregon. She has standing to bring claims related to products she did not herself purchase, but not unidentified products. Claims alleging violations of state consumer protection laws are sufficiently pleaded and not subject to dismissal under a number of theories, but an unjust enrichment claim is dismissed.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Chesney, Filed On: July 25, 2023, Case #: 3:23cv865, NOS: Other Fraud - Torts - Personal Property, Categories: Fraud, Consumer Law
J. White grants the online education company's motion to compel arbitration of the user's claims alleging that she was enrolled in an automatic e-textbook renewal program without her knowledge or express consent. The online platform's terms of use include an arbitration agreement which is sufficiently conspicuous to give users constructive notice, and the user unambiguously assented to the agreement by creating an account, despite her assertion that she never clicked a "create an account" button to do so.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: White, Filed On: July 25, 2023, Case #: 4:22cv9123, NOS: Other Fraud - Torts - Personal Property, Categories: Arbitration, Fraud, Consumer Law
J. Tigar grants summary judgment to the asylum-support organizations in their suit seeking to overturn a rule which applies a presumption of asylum ineligibility to noncitizens who travel through a country other than their home country before entering the United States from Mexico. The rule is contrary to law because its presumption is based on criteria that Congress expressly intended should not affect access to asylum when passing the relevant law. It is also arbitrary and capricious, since it relies on the availability of other pathways for migration to the United States and explains the scope of its exceptions by reference to the availability of other, often unavailable exceptions.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Tigar, Filed On: July 25, 2023, Case #: 4:18cv6810, NOS: Other Immigration Actions - Immigration, Categories: Administrative Law, Immigration
J. Corley grants the patent defendant's motion to dismiss the patent claimant's suit alleging that it infringed on patents for a system to determine a user's risk of Covid-19 exposure based on monitoring of wireless networks in the area of a viral event. While the defendant's accused product bears important similarities to those described in the asserted patents, they do not satisfy limitations in each.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Corley, Filed On: July 24, 2023, Case #: 3:23cv2695, NOS: Patent - Property Rights, Categories: Patent, Covid-19
J. Breyer denies the county's motion to dismiss the arrestee's claims against several county employees related to the conditions of his detention in two county holding facilities, but denies the arrestee's motions for sanctions and entry of final judgment. The arrestee has adequately connected the employees to his allegations, and while the county's present refusal to help effectuate service on its employees is understandably irritating to the arrestee, it is not sanctionable.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Breyer, Filed On: July 21, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv750, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Sanctions
J. Freeman denies the prisoners' motion to consider whether to seal neutral monitor reports in their suit alleging failures to provide adequate health care, accommodations for disabilities and protection from violence at the Monterey County Jail. The monitor reports and documents referring to them will be filed publicly with only limited redactions. Joint motions to file portions of the prisoners' enforcement motion and supporting evidence under seal are granted.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Freeman, Filed On: July 21, 2023, Case #: 5:13cv2354, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Prisoners' Rights
J. Breyer dismisses private claims remaining against McKinsey and Co. in long-running legal battles over their marketing role in helping Purdue Pharma manufacture and sell opioids. The company has or is in the process of settling the claims with various government entities, Native tribes and private companies, but a handful of private plaintiffs have continued to sue the company on behalf of minors with neonatal abstinence syndrome. Negligence claims from the private plaintiffs cannot survive due to the fact that McKinsey, while key in helping boost the sales of opioids, was not directly in the business of prescribing them to pregnant women. Its consulting role in the opioid crisis is not enough to establish a special relationship between the women and the company.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Breyer, Filed On: July 20, 2023, Case #: 3:21md2996, NOS: Personal Injury - Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury/Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Fraud, Product Liability
J. Martínez-Olguín finds in favor of Santa Clara District Attorney Jeffrey Rosen after he was sued by a deputy district attorney who says Rosen retaliated against him when the deputy attorney published an unauthorized op-ed in The Mercury News that discussed various criminal justice reforms. The doctrine of res judicata bars the attorney's retaliation claims as they contain the same causes of action that have already been litigated and ruled on. The matter has also already been resolved in arbitration, which resulted in the arbitrator sustaining a suspension against the deputy attorney.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Martínez-Olguín , Filed On: July 20, 2023, Case #: 3:21cv7583, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment Retaliation
J. Gilliam Jr. allows some false advertising claims to continue against L'Oreal over allegations that the company sells cosmetics products that appear to provide sunscreen protection for 24 hours, when they only last for two. There is a label on the products that tells consumers to reapply the product every two hours, but it's printed under a peel-back sticker that may not be immediately visible to a purchasing consumer. It's plausible that this could dupe a typical buyer.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Gilliam Jr. , Filed On: July 17, 2023, Case #: 4:22cv7609, NOS: Other Fraud - Torts - Personal Property, Categories: Consumer Law, Class Action, False Advertising
J. Hixson declines to find in favor of San Francisco on a former emergency services employee’s gender harassment claims. The employee alleges, among other things, that her supervisor constantly called her and other female workers “minions” and that co-workers called her lazy and ditzy during her pregnancy. There is sufficient evidence from these allegations to infer gender bias. The employee can also pursue her FMLA interference claim alleging that the city retaliated against her decision to take FMLA leave by transferring her to a station with less desirable hours.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Hixson, Filed On: July 13, 2023, Case #: 3:21cv2819, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, Employment Discrimination, Employment Retaliation
J. Chesney finds in favor of two California pet food manufacturers in the consumers' class action alleging that they were tricked into thinking the manufacturers' pet food contains medicine because the pet food had to be prescribed by a vet. As an industry standard, being prescribed a certain pet food by a vet is not necessarily an indication that the pet food contains drugs or medicine, and the products already have accurate, clear ingredient lists that do not require a veterinarian to understand.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Chesney, Filed On: July 12, 2023, Case #: 3:16cv7001, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: Consumer Law, Class Action