§Why CasetextPricing

Forever 21, Inc. v. Gucci America, Inc. et al

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Count II

24 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 253,227 times   279 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

  2. Medimmune, Inc. v. GenenTech, Inc.

    549 U.S. 118 (2007)   Cited 2,539 times   90 Legal Analyses
    Holding "the phrase 'case of actual controversy' in the Act refers to the types of 'Cases' and 'Controversies' that are justiciable under Article III"

  3. Cafasso v. General Dynamics C4 Systems

    637 F.3d 1047 (9th Cir. 2011)   Cited 2,502 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding a complaint failed to satisfy Rule 9(b) where the allegations were lacking in detail

  4. Franklin v. Murphy

    745 F.2d 1221 (9th Cir. 1984)   Cited 9,076 times
    Holding that district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to appoint replacement counsel

  5. Mendiondo v. Centinela

    521 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 1,949 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the heightened pleading requirements of Rule 9(b) do not apply

  6. Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux Tribe v. U.S.

    90 F.3d 351 (9th Cir. 1996)   Cited 293 times
    Holding that discretion to dismiss without leave to amend is particularly strong where leave to amend has been previously granted

  7. Airs Aromatics, LLC v. Op. Victoria's Secret Stores Brand Mgmt., Inc.

    744 F.3d 595 (9th Cir. 2014)   Cited 140 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding leave to amend would be futile and noting “a party cannot amend pleadings to directly contradict an earlier assertion made in the same proceeding” (cleaned up)

  8. Ditri v. Coldwell Banker

    954 F.2d 869 (3d Cir. 1992)   Cited 125 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding a petition to the USPTO is the "primary means of securing a cancellation" and that § 1119 provides no independent basis for jurisdiction

  9. Hokto Kinoko Co. v. Concord Farms, Inc.

    810 F. Supp. 2d 1013 (C.D. Cal. 2011)   Cited 38 times
    Finding likelihood of consumer confusion despite no evidence of actual consumer confusion

  10. GMA Accessories, Inc. v. Idea Nuova, Inc.

    157 F. Supp. 2d 234 (S.D.N.Y. 2000)   Cited 33 times
    Holding that § 1120 "does not apply to trademark applications that have not been registered"

  11. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 346,412 times   923 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Section 1127 - Construction and definitions; intent of chapter

    15 U.S.C. § 1127   Cited 2,943 times   95 Legal Analyses
    Granting standing under § 1114 to the legal representative of the registrant of a trademark

  13. Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1052   Cited 1,578 times   260 Legal Analyses
    Granting authority to refuse registration to a trademark that so resembles a registered mark "as to be likely, when used on or in connection with the goods of the applicant, to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive"

  14. Section 1065 - Incontestability of right to use mark under certain conditions

    15 U.S.C. § 1065   Cited 1,105 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Listing the requirements for incontestability

  15. Section 1119 - Power of court over registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1119   Cited 807 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court the power in an action involving a registered mark to order the cancellation of a registration