§Why CasetextPricing

Animal Legal Defense Fund et al v. HVFG, L.L.C. et al

RESPONSE

34 Cited authorities

  1. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 279,746 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

  2. Conley v. Gibson

    355 U.S. 41 (1957)   Cited 59,319 times   25 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief"

  3. Foman v. Davis

    371 U.S. 178 (1962)   Cited 29,738 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an appeal was improperly dismissed when the record as a whole — including a timely but incomplete notice of appeal and a premature but complete notice — revealed the orders petitioner sought to appeal

  4. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dept

    901 F.2d 696 (9th Cir. 1988)   Cited 16,507 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a cognizable gender discrimination claim could be brought by a female domestic violence victim where the victim alleged police denied protection and made misogynistic comments including that "he did not blame [the victim's] husband for hitting her, because of the way she was 'carrying on'"

  5. Cahill v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.

    80 F.3d 336 (9th Cir. 1996)   Cited 3,357 times
    Holding that allegations of material fact are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to plaintiff

  6. Carey v. Population Services International

    431 U.S. 678 (1977)   Cited 846 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a provider of contraceptives could bring a derivative constitutional challenge on behalf of potential customers

  7. DeSoto v. Yellow Freight Systems, Inc.

    957 F.2d 655 (9th Cir. 1992)   Cited 1,790 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding district court did not abuse discretion in denying leave to amend when no facts consistent with the complaint could save plaintiff's claims

  8. TrafficSchool.com, Inc. v. Edriver Inc.

    653 F.3d 820 (9th Cir. 2011)   Cited 739 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that district court committed no error in holding that the defendants violated the Lanham Act but declining to make an award of profits, where the plaintiffs "didn't produce any proof of past injury or causation"

  9. Southland Sod Farms v. Stover Seed Co.

    108 F.3d 1134 (9th Cir. 1997)   Cited 706 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that defendants cannot be liable for false advertising when they were not "responsible for disseminating the offending advertisements"

  10. Novartis Consumer Health v. Johnson Johnson

    290 F.3d 578 (3d Cir. 2002)   Cited 562 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court erred "in finding that a message of superior efficacy is necessarily implied" by defendant's advertising and "[i]nstead, [plaintiff] should have been required to prove through a consumer survey that the name and advertising actually misled or had a tendency to mislead consumers"

  11. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 163,831 times   197 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

  12. Section 1125 - False designations of origin, false descriptions, and dilution forbidden

    15 U.S.C. § 1125   Cited 15,763 times   327 Legal Analyses
    Holding "the person who asserts trade dress protection has the burden of proving that the matter sought to be protected is not functional"