§Why CasetextPricing

Anthony Heras v. Nelnet, Inc., et al

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint

22 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 252,377 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. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 266,313 times   365 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "

  3. Moss v. U.S. Secret Service

    572 F.3d 962 (9th Cir. 2009)   Cited 8,716 times
    Holding that the court lacked jurisdiction over the district court's deferral of the summary judgment motion

  4. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dept

    901 F.2d 696 (9th Cir. 1988)   Cited 15,979 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. Schreiber Distributing v. Serv-Well Furniture

    806 F.2d 1393 (9th Cir. 1986)   Cited 2,280 times
    Holding that Rule 9(b) requires the plaintiff to "state with particularity" the "circumstances constituting the fraud," including a statement of "the time, place, and specific content of the false representations as well as the identities of the parties to the misrepresentation."

  6. Western Min. Council v. Watt

    643 F.2d 618 (9th Cir. 1981)   Cited 2,863 times
    Holding the Court should not "assume the truth of legal conclusions merely because they are cast in the form of factual allegations"

  7. DeSoto v. Yellow Freight Systems, Inc.

    957 F.2d 655 (9th Cir. 1992)   Cited 1,726 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. Al-Kidd v. Ashcroft

    580 F.3d 949 (9th Cir. 2009)   Cited 781 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Iqbal does not impose a probability requirement

  9. Summit Technology, Inc. v. High-Line Medical Instruments Co., Inc.

    922 F. Supp. 299 (C.D. Cal. 1996)   Cited 83 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, although “a plaintiff may bring a Lanham Act cause of action for affirmatively misrepresenting facts, even if the truth of those facts may be governed by FDA regulations,” he may not sue for “failure to disclose a ‘fact,’ the truth of which is currently being reviewed and determined by the FDA”

  10. Mirfasihi v. Fleet Mortgage Corp.

    551 F.3d 682 (7th Cir. 2008)   Cited 36 times
    Holding that mortgage bank was not a "consumer reporting agency" under FCRA

  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 345,529 times   922 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 1446 - Procedure for removal of civil actions

    28 U.S.C. § 1446   Cited 21,736 times   141 Legal Analyses
    Granting a defendant 30 days to remove after receipt of the first pleading that sets forth a removable claim

  13. Section 1681 - Congressional findings and statement of purpose

    15 U.S.C. § 1681   Cited 6,294 times   190 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing the need to protect "the consumer's right to privacy"

  14. Section 1681a - Definitions; rules of construction

    15 U.S.C. § 1681a   Cited 1,479 times   58 Legal Analyses
    Adopting definition of "credit" and "creditor" as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1691a(d)-(e)