Jennifer L. Thurston

“The motion to dismiss the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Claims for Relief as stated against Blue Diamond Growers is GRANTED, with leave to amend.”

“Defendant's motion to dismiss is GRANTED with the following exceptions: a. The motion is DENIED as to Plaintiff's Title VII retaliation claim based upon her transfer to office work only and GRANTED in all other respects. ... b. The motion is DENIED as to Plaintiff's Title VII sex discrimination based on a hostile work environment.”

“1. The Findings and Recommendations dated (Doc. 16) are ADOPTED in full. 2. Plaintiff's motion to dismiss (Doc. 8) is GRANTED. 3. Defendant's first and second counterclaims are DISMISSED with leave to amend.”

“The petition for writ of habeas corpus is GRANTED. ... Respondents are ORDERED TO RELEASE Petitioner immediately.”

“The petition for writ of habeas corpus is GRANTED.”

“Counter-Defendants' motion to strike is granted in part and denied in part as follows: a. Counter-Defendants' motion to strike the first cause of action for defamation is DENIED. b. Counter-Defendants' motion to strike the second and third causes of action for intentional interference with contractual relations are GRANTED without leave to amend.”

“Counter-Defendants' motion to dismiss is granted in part and denied in part as follows: a. Counter-Defendants' motion to dismiss the first cause of action for defamation is DENIED. b. Counter-Defendants' motion to dismiss the second and third causes of action for intentional interference with contractual relations are GRANTED without leave to amend.”

“Thus, because the Closing Date Deadline was June 29, 2021 and the Closing and Closing Date had not yet occurred, and because Defendants make no compelling argument to support their position that Plaintiff's purported failure to satisfy manufacturer conditions bears on the sufficiency of the allegations, Defendants' motion to dismiss (Doc. 43) is DENIED.”

“In short, the Court is unconcerned that the calls were recorded—this was a consequence of Mr. Guilford's decision to use the phones that he knew would result in the calls being recorded. The Court's concern results only upon the government listening to the calls, which, as noted above, has not resulted in prejudice to Mr. Guilford. Again, there is no hint that the AUSA or those currently involved in this action have gained any information about Mr. Guilford's trial strategy or otherwise. While the entire situation is unfortunate, it does not convince the Court that dismissal of the indictment is warranted. Thus, the motion to dismiss the indictment is DENIED.”

“Because the Court finds there was probable cause to support the search warrant for the cell phone data, the motion to suppress (Doc. 1120) is DENIED.”

“For the reasons set forth above, Petitioner's motions for a temporary restraining order (Docs. 2, 3) are DENIED”

“The Findings and Recommendations issued on September 24, 2025 (Doc. 34) are ADOPTED in full. 2. Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Doc. 26) is GRANTED. 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment for Defendants, terminate all pending motions, and to close this case.”

“Plaintiff's motion reconsideration (Doc. 12) is DENIED. 2. The case shall remain closed, and the Court will not consider any further filings in this action.”