The district court dismissed a habeas petition as moot after the petitioner was released on bond, finding that any future re-detention was speculative and hypothetical.
A California federal court referred Fernando Hernandez Rodriguez’s habeas petition to Federal Defenders for an evaluation of whether appointed counsel would benefit him and barred his transfer outside the Southern District of California while the petition remains pending.
The Southern District of California granted an Ethiopian petitioner’s habeas petition in part, finding that ICE’s written age determination failed to evaluate the evidence as required by the TVPRA and ORR procedures, and ordered his transfer to ORR custody without deciding his actual age
The court refused to enforce an arbitration clause buried in Sony’s limited warranty and allowed the constitutional privacy and public-disclosure claims to proceed while dismissing numerous other claims with leave to amend.
The Eastern District of California adopted the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations in full and dismissed Donald Ray Dison Jr.’s civil-rights action with prejudice for failure to state a claim, failure to comply with the court’s order, and failure to prosecute.
A magistrate judge recommended granting a Haitian parolee’s habeas petition and ordering his immediate release because immigration officials re-detained him without a pre-deprivation hearing.
The Eastern District of California adopted a magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations and denied Malik Davis’s motions to amend his excessive-force complaint because the proposed state-law battery and official-capacity claims would be futile.
A federal district court granted an immigration detainee’s habeas petition and ordered his immediate release, finding that a lengthy delay in providing a statutorily required bond hearing violated due process.
The Eastern District of California compelled Iris Cervantes to arbitrate her individual employment claims, finding her arbitration agreement only minimally procedurally unconscionable and not substantively unconscionable.
A California federal court ordered Barbara Kunde Minuzzi’s immediate release from immigration custody, holding that detention to effect removal was unauthorized while her motion to reopen kept a statutory stay of removal in force.
A California federal court ordered an ADA plaintiff to show cause within 14 days why his Unruh Act claim should not be dismissed without prejudice under § 1367(c)(4), citing the Ninth Circuit’s comity concerns in Arroyo v. Rosas.
A federal district court in California ordered disability-rights plaintiffs to show cause within 14 days why their state-law Unruh Act claim should not be dismissed without prejudice, citing Ninth Circuit guidance that federal courts should decline supplemental jurisdiction over such claims at an ea
The Central District of California entered judgment dismissing Jianfeng Liu’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus without prejudice, pursuant to its October 28, 2026 dismissal order.
The district court accepted a magistrate judge’s report in part, granting the defendant’s anti-SLAPP motion to strike only the retaliatory eviction claim because it was barred by claim preclusion arising from a prior unlawful detainer judgment, while rejecting objections to the remaining
Following a $3 million jury verdict against two Los Angeles police officers for civil rights violations, the court awarded the plaintiff’s attorneys $2,166,670 in fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, finding the requested hourly rates largely reasonable and rejecting arguments that the fees should be
The district court ordered plaintiffs to show cause why their Unruh Act claim should not be dismissed without prejudice, stating that the case appears to be one in which exceptional circumstances under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(4) justify declining supplemental jurisdiction over the state-law claim in an
A federal court gave Rogelio Santibanez until November 6, 2026, to explain why his case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution, identifying unfinished default proceedings against two defendants and warning that no response would be treated as consent to dismissal.
The Central District of California ordered the plaintiff to show cause in writing by November 13, 2026, why the action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution after he failed to seek entry of default against a defendant that had not answered.
The Central District of California ordered the plaintiff to show cause in writing by November 13, 2026, why the action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution after the defendant failed to answer and the plaintiff did not seek entry of default.
The Central District of California denied James H. Lundberg’s request to preliminarily bar CSTown from using its mark, finding insufficient similarity and actual confusion to establish likely success, and concluding that delay and speculative sales losses defeated his claim of imminent irrepar
Magistrate Judge A. Joel Richlin enters a stipulated protective order governing the designation, challenge, use, and final disposition of confidential discovery material in this employment action.
Chief Judge Dolly M. Gee ordered Marco Ruiz to show cause why the Central District of California should not decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over his Unruh Act, California Disabled Persons Act, and negligence claims, citing California’s heightened pleading rules and comity concern
The Central District of California dismissed Marco Ruiz’s action against Isabelle Confections LLC and other defendants without costs and without prejudice after counsel advised the court that the case had settled.
The Central District of California dismissed this action without prejudice after counsel advised that the parties had settled, retaining jurisdiction and allowing reopening within 30 days if the settlement is not consummated.