19 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 263,589 times 281 Legal Analyses
Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 276,823 times 369 Legal Analyses
Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing
Erickson v. Pardus
551 U.S. 89 (2007) Cited 64,362 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that a complaint must "give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests"
Hebbe v. Pliler
611 F.3d 1202 (9th Cir. 2010) Cited 7,929 times
Holding pro se complaints should be liberally construed
Starr v. Baca
652 F.3d 1202 (9th Cir. 2011) Cited 5,495 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that a series of investigative reports documenting systemic deficiencies in a jail put the defendant-supervisor on notice of the risk of the harm that befell the plaintiff
In re Gilead Sciences
536 F.3d 1049 (9th Cir. 2008) Cited 3,014 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a court need not accept as true "allegations that are merely conclusory"
Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp.
539 U.S. 23 (2003) Cited 755 times 23 Legal Analyses
Holding that federal trademark law helps assure the mark holder that it "will reap the financial, reputation-related rewards associated with a desirable product" rather than an imitator (quoting Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Prods. Co. , 514 U.S. 159, 163–164, 115 S.Ct. 1300, 131 L.Ed.2d 248 (1995) )
Lucas v. Department of Corrections
66 F.3d 245 (9th Cir. 1995) Cited 2,417 times
Holding that dismissal of a pro se complaint without leave to amend is proper only if it is clear that the deficiencies cannot be cured by amendment or after the pro se litigant is given an opportunity to amend
Brookfield Communications, Inc. v. West Coast Entertainment Corp.
174 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 1999) Cited 1,100 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding mark use was not sufficiently public when used in a website domain and in "limited correspondence with lawyers and a few customers"
Porter v. Jones
319 F.3d 483 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 930 times
Finding it permissible to consider allegations that were "rooted in past events" when the relief sought was prospective
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 357,946 times 950 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 162,144 times 197 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
Rule 201 - Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts
Fed. R. Evid. 201 Cited 29,440 times 26 Legal Analyses
Holding "[n]ormally, in deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, courts must limit their inquiry to the facts stated in the complaint and the documents either attached to or incorporated in the complaint. However, courts may also consider matters of which they may take judicial notice."
Section 107 - Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
17 U.S.C. § 107 Cited 1,035 times 177 Legal Analyses
Noting that the third factor concerns "the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole"
Section 512 - Limitations on liability relating to material online
17 U.S.C. § 512 Cited 599 times 187 Legal Analyses
Denying the safe harbor if the service provider receives "a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity"

Anderson v. Google Inc.

19 Cited authorities

Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint

Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing

Holding that a complaint must "give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests"

Holding pro se complaints should be liberally construed

Holding that a series of investigative reports documenting systemic deficiencies in a jail put the defendant-supervisor on notice of the risk of the harm that befell the plaintiff

Holding that a court need not accept as true "allegations that are merely conclusory"

Holding that federal trademark law helps assure the mark holder that it "will reap the financial, reputation-related rewards associated with a desirable product" rather than an imitator (quoting Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Prods. Co. , 514 U.S. 159, 163–164, 115 S.Ct. 1300, 131 L.Ed.2d 248 (1995) )

Holding that dismissal of a pro se complaint without leave to amend is proper only if it is clear that the deficiencies cannot be cured by amendment or after the pro se litigant is given an opportunity to amend

Holding mark use was not sufficiently public when used in a website domain and in "limited correspondence with lawyers and a few customers"

Finding it permissible to consider allegations that were "rooted in past events" when the relief sought was prospective

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

Noting that the third factor concerns "the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole"

Denying the safe harbor if the service provider receives "a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity"