§Why CasetextPricing

AT&T Mobility LLC et al v. AU Optronics Corporation et al

MOTION to Dismiss PLAINTIFFS AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

59 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 266,691 times   281 Legal Analyses
    Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint

  2. 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

  3. Associated General Contractors v. Carpenters

    459 U.S. 519 (1983)   Cited 5,220 times   34 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union lacked standing to sue for injuries passed on to it by intermediaries

  4. United States v. Bestfoods

    524 U.S. 51 (1998)   Cited 1,446 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Holding that ownership and control is insufficient to demonstrate an alter-ego relationship

  5. Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois

    431 U.S. 720 (1977)   Cited 1,310 times   61 Legal Analyses
    Holding that indirect purchasers cannot recover damages under federal antitrust law

  6. Thornhill Pub. v. General Telephone Elec

    594 F.2d 730 (9th Cir. 1979)   Cited 2,989 times
    Holding that conclusory and speculative affidavits are insufficient to defeat summary judgment

  7. Kendall v. Visa

    518 F.3d 1042 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 599 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that leave to amend would be futile where plaintiff was granted leave to amend once before and the amended complaint contained the same deficiencies as the prior complaint

  8. Daugherty v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc.

    144 Cal.App.4th 824 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 583 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding plaintiff failed to plead a fraudulent omission where "no representation was made to which the alleged concealment was contrary"

  9. Kansas v. Utilicorp United Inc.

    497 U.S. 199 (1990)   Cited 223 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding the exception to Illinois Brick did not apply even where the direct purchaser almost certainly passed on the entire cost of an alleged overcharge to the indirect purchaser because no facts were alleged to support the allegation of conspiracy

  10. Morgan v. AT&T Wireless Services Inc.

    177 Cal.App.4th 1235 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 255 times
    Holding "a fraudulent business practice is one that is likely to deceive members of the public"

  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 361,353 times   960 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 17200 - Unfair competition defined

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200   Cited 18,392 times   316 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting unlawful business practices

  13. Section 1 - Trusts, etc., in restraint of trade illegal; penalty

    15 U.S.C. § 1   Cited 3,250 times   78 Legal Analyses
    Forbidding every "contract, combination . . . or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States"

  14. Section 480-2 - Unfair competition, practices, declared unlawful

    Haw. Rev. Stat. § 480-2   Cited 517 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Declaring unlawful "unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce"

  15. Section 16720 - Trust

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 16720   Cited 429 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting any combination to prevent competition in the "sale or purchase of any commodity"

  16. Section 480-1 - Definitions

    Haw. Rev. Stat. § 480-1   Cited 114 times
    Defining "consumer"

  17. Section 1-3 - Laws not retrospective

    Haw. Rev. Stat. § 1-3   Cited 77 times
    Stating that "no law has any retrospective operation, unless otherwise expressed or obviously intended."

  18. Section 59-801 - Restraint of trade or commerce; unlawful; penalty

    Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 59-801   Cited 17 times

    Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy in restraint of trade or commerce, within this state, is hereby declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any such contract or engage in any such combination or conspiracy shall be deemed guilty of a Class IV felony. Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 59-801 Laws 1905, c. 162, § 1, p. 636; R.S.1913, § 4045; C.S.1922, § 3448; C.S.1929, § 59-801; R.S.1943, § 59-801; Laws 1977, LB 39, § 63; Laws 1983, LB 32, § 1.

  19. Section 553.1 - Short title

    Iowa Code § 553.1   Cited 10 times

    This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Iowa Competition Law". Iowa Code § 553.1 C77, 79, 81, §553.1

  20. Section 740 ILCS 10/1

    740 ILCS 10/1   Cited 61 times

    This Act shall be known and may be cited as the Illinois Antitrust Act. 740 ILCS 10/1 Laws 1965, p. 1943.