Loren B. Roth

9th Circuit Court of Appeals (33 summaries)

United States v. Preston

A lifetime term of supervised release for the offense of abusive sexual contact was proper when the sentencing judge provided ample reasons for imposing the term and accounted for the defendant’s age and mental capacity.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Sentencing

United States v. Olsen

In a trial for the possession of biological toxins, undisclosed evidence refuting an expert witness’s credibility did not fundamentally change the result of the trial, because other “overwhelming” evidence, including extensive internet research concerning biological weapons and terrorism, supported the conviction.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

United States v. Scott

Despite the lack of a timely written response to a motion to suppress, the government’s oral argument and written response to the magistrate judge’s recommendation preserve its automobile exception argument for appeal.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Appellate Procedure

In re Amy & Vicky

The Ninth Circuit will not reconsider its prior interpretation of the Crime Victims Rights Act, denying restitution to child pornography victims where no causal connection between the defendant’s offense and the victim’s specific losses exists, absent higher authority from the Ninth Circuit en banc or the U.S. Supreme Court.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Remedies

United States v. Elk Shoulder

Congress acted within its enumerated powers, derived from its authority to ensure public safety under the Necessary and Proper Clause, when it enacted the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Eche v. Holder

A lawful permanent resident’s time residing in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands before 2009, when federal immigration law became effective, does not count toward the five-year residency requirement for naturalization.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Immigration

Davis v. HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A.

The district court properly incorporates extrinsic evidence in a 12(b)(6) motion when the evidence is referenced in the complaint and the party opposing incorporation fails to challenge its authenticity by arguing that he lacked access to the evidence.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Procedure

Center for Biological Diversity v. Salazar

The Fish and Wildlife Service's determination that oil and gas regulation would take only “relatively small numbers” of polar bears and Pacific walruses in relation to population size is consistent with and permissible under the MMPA and other environmental statutes.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Environmental Law

Jackson v. State of Nevada

A trial court’s denial of relevant police witness testimony regarding an alleged victim’s past false accusations of rape violates a defendant’s constitutional right to present a defense and confront witnesses.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Evidence

Nian v. Holder

Denial of an alien crewmember’s petition in “asylum-only” proceedings is the "functional equivalent" of a final order of removal giving a reviewing court jurisdiction.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Immigration

Johnson v. Uribe

Vacating a defendant’s conviction and granting him a new trial is an adequate remedy for a constitutional violation of ineffective assistance of counsel when the violation occurred during the plea negotiation stage.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

Du v. Allstate Insurance Co.

Under the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, an insurer’s duty to settle includes the duty to effectuate settlement even in the absence of a demand.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Insurance Law

Schechner v. KPIX-TV

A plaintiff’s statistical evidence of age discrimination need not factor in legitimate non-discriminatory reasons for termination to meet the minimal burden of proof at step one of the McDonnell Douglas framework.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Employment Law

Detrich v. Ryan

A petition for habeas corpus on a penalty-phase ineffective assistance of counsel claim is granted when: the state post-conviction court unreasonably applied federal law and the deficient performance prejudiced the defense.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

United States v. Onyesoh

The government must show some proof of the usability of an unauthorized access device, such as expired credit card numbers, when its use is not readily apparent.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

United States v. Ressam

The decrease in sentencing of convicted terrorist, Ahmed Ressam, by the district court was "substantially unreasonable" taking into account his recantation of testimony, public safety, and deterrence. The district court failed to justify the variance from the Sentencing Guidelines calculation.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Sentencing

Bowers v. Whitman

The State of Oregon did not commit a taking, when the Oregon voters enacted Measure 49, because owner’s property had not vested. Further Measure 49 did not violate procedural due process or equal protection rights because the measure did not implicate fundamental rights and was not based on a suspect class.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Leigh v. Salazar

The Press-Enterprise II qualified right of access balancing test applies to media access to a government run horse roundup because the test balances the media’s ability to monitor all government activities not just criminal proceedings.

Area(s) of Law:
  • First Amendment

Secalt S.A. v. Wuxi Shenxi Construction Machinery Co.

A companies external design elements are not entitled to trade dress protection unless they can prove that the design does not serve any functional purpose and used only to set their design apart.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

Thorpe Insulation Co. v. Motor Vehicle Causality Co.

Non-Settling insurance carriers have standing to appeal § 543(g) bankruptcy reorganization plans when the Court is able to order modification or reversal of the plan and the plan has potentially adverse effects on insurance providers.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Bankruptcy Law

United States v. Shetler

Exculpatory confessions obtained by an illegal search and seizure can not be used as evidence unless the government can prove that the confession was obtained by legal means.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Johnson v. Finn

Due Process Clause requires the district court to hold a separate evidentiary hearing when rejecting a magistrate judge's ruling that the prosecution had racial motivation for excluding jurors.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Sacks v. Dietrich

The federal district court has jurisdiction over state law claims against arbitrators when the central question of the case is the violation of regulatory authorities arbitration rules.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Alternative Dispute Resolution

Kairy v. SuperShuttle Int’l

The district court’s employee status determination would not interfere or frustrate the regulatory authority of the California Public Utilities Commission over passenger stage corporations because policy determinations regarding employment status made by the PUC are not synonymous with California state law.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Administrative Law

Gonzales v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

The Ninth Circuit's opinion Duran Gonzales II , finds that the Plaintiffs are ineligible for adjustment of status as the case is applied retroactively to those who applied for adjustment prior to the opinion.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Immigration

Apple Inc. v. Psystar Corp.

A copyright misuse defense is invalid when a licensing agreement restricts the use of its own software and not the development of competing software.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Copyright

American Trucking Associations v. Los Angeles

Federal law preempts the employment provision of the Port of Los Angeles concessions agreements with drayage truck carriers because the law interferes with third party employment relationships.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Law

E.T. v. Cantil-Sakauye

The abstention doctrine does not allow the Court to adjudicate complaints were the relief sought would require the Federal Court to investigate into the administration and operation of the state’s juvenile court system.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Samuels v. Holland American Line-USA Inc.

A cruise line does not owe a duty to warn passengers about the dangers of a local beach because wading or swimming in the ocean are not actions uniquely associated with maritime travel.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Tort Law

Estate of Amaro v. City of Oakland

A statute of limitation defense will succumb to equitable estoppel when defendants misrepresent and withhold facts material to the cause of action.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Tort Law

Chism v. Washington State

Qualified immunity is not available to government employees in a § 1983 claim based on judicial deception when the plaintiff can substantially prove, that but for the dishonesty of the officers, the warrant would not have been issued.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Law

WPP Luxembourg Gamma Three Sarl v. Spot Runner, Inc.

Sufficiently plead facts demonstrating a misrepresentation or omission in violation of Section 10b -5(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act cannot be extended to a Section 10b-5(a) or (c) fraudulent scheme claim.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Corporations

Close v. Thomas

The Court denied Close and nine other prisoners habeas corpus petitions, holding that the plain language of the statute does not allow BOP to determine RDAP waitlist positions based on a potential early release date after successful completion of the program.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus