7 results for 'judge:"Callahan"'.
J. Callahan denies a petition for review of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's decision granting Pacific Gas & Electric's request for an exemption to the deadline for a federal license renewal application for the continued operation of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Callahan, Filed On: April 29, 2024, Case #: 23-852, Categories: Energy, Licensing
[Consolidated] J. Callahan dismisses three consolidated appeals challenging the district court’s decision to remand each of the underlying product liability actions back to California state court. The three consolidated product liability matters were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Callahan, Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: 23-55403, Categories: Product Liability, Jurisdiction
J. Callahan finds that the district court properly dismissed, for failure to state a claim, an action alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act when a biopharmaceutical company's chief executive officer and vice president announced that it might have discovered a “cure” for Covid-19. In context, the company’s representations in a press release, a Fox News article and a BioSpace.com article were not materially false or misleading. The allegations in stockholders' class-action complaint did not support the requisite strong inference of scienter in the company’s intent to improperly manipulate the price of the company's shares. Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Callahan, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 22-55641, Categories: Securities, Covid-19
J. Callahan finds that the district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of agricultural associations and enjoins the California Attorney General from enforcing Proposition 65’s carcinogen warning requirement for the herbicide glyphosate, best known as the active ingredient in the herbicide Roundup. The proposed Proposition 65 warnings as applied to glyphosate were not purely factual and uncontroversial and were therefore subject to "intermediate scrutiny." Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Callahan, Filed On: November 7, 2023, Case #: 20-16758, Categories: Administrative Law, Agriculture
J. Callahan finds that the district court properly imposed a sentence on defendant after a guilty plea to possessing a firearm as a felon. The panel rejected defendant’s argument that there was insufficient evidence to support the district court’s finding that he possessed a firearm in connection with another felony offense under Montana law for purposes of applying the enhancement. Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Callahan, Filed On: October 4, 2023, Case #: 22-30030, Categories: Evidence, Firearms
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. Callahan finds that the district court improperly denied a motion for a preliminary injunction in an action brought by the Fellowship of Christian Athletes (FCA) against the San Jose Unified School District for violation of FCA’s First Amendment rights to free exercise of religion and free speech, and directed the district court to enter an order reinstating FCA’s recognition as an official Associated Student Body approved student club. FCA requires its student leaders to affirm a Statement of Faith, which includes the belief that sexual relations should be within the confines of a marriage between a man and a woman. The San Jose Unified School District revoked FCA’s status as an official student club because of "non-discrimination policies." The FCA had organizational standing and its claims were not moot because the District’s actions frustrated the FCA’s mission. Reversed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Callahan, Filed On: September 13, 2023, Case #: 22-15827, Categories: Education, First Amendment
J. Callahan finds that the district court improperly entered summary judgment in favor of the City and County of San Francisco in an action challenging the City’s Healthy Airport Ordinance. The ordinance requires airlines that contract with the City to use San Francisco International Airport to provide employees with certain health insurance benefits. A representative of the airlines claimed that by enacting the ordinance and amending San Francisco International Airport's contract with the airlines, the City acted as a government regulator and not as a market participant. Civil penalty provisions carried the force of law and therefore made the City and County of San Francisco a regulator. Reversed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Callahan, Filed On: August 29, 2023, Case #: 22-15677, Categories: Employment, Health Care, Municipal Law