§Why CasetextPricing

Bimont et al v. Unilever United States, Inc.

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Opposition re: 18 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12

46 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 255,413 times   280 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 269,161 times   367 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. Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr

    518 U.S. 470 (1996)   Cited 2,420 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the presence of a state-law damages remedy for violations of FDA requirements does not impose an additional requirement upon medical device manufacturers but "merely provides another reason for manufacturers to comply with . . . federal law"

  4. Wyeth v. Levine

    555 U.S. 555 (2009)   Cited 1,435 times   101 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the FDA's drug labeling judgments pursuant to the FDCA did not obstacle preempt state law products liability claims

  5. Bates v. Dow Agrosciences LLC

    544 U.S. 431 (2005)   Cited 550 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a preemption clause barring state laws "in addition to or different" from a federal Act does not interfere with an "equivalent" state provision

  6. Chance v. Armstrong

    143 F.3d 698 (2d Cir. 1998)   Cited 2,960 times
    Holding that "[t]he standard for Eighth Amendment violations contemplates ‘a condition of urgency’ that may result in ‘degeneration’ or ‘extreme pain’ "

  7. Kwikset Corp. v. Superior Court

    51 Cal.4th 310 (Cal. 2011)   Cited 1,568 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Holding "the standards for establishing standing under section 17204 and eligibility for restitution under section 17203 are wholly distinct"

  8. Williams v. Gerber Products

    552 F.3d 934 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 930 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "reasonable consumers expect that the ingredient list ... confirms other representations on the packaging"

  9. In re Suprema Specialties, Inc.

    438 F.3d 256 (3d Cir. 2006)   Cited 552 times
    Holding that "[i]f no controlled person is liable, there can be no controlling person liability"

  10. Famous Horse Inc. v. 5th Ave. Photo Inc.

    624 F.3d 106 (2d Cir. 2010)   Cited 325 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding allegation that plaintiff clothing retailer lost sales to lower-priced counterfeit garments sold by defendant wholesaler constituted a "competitive injury" for a Lanham Act trademark infringement claim

  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 348,708 times   930 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 157,731 times   196 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

  13. Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 15   Cited 91,342 times   91 Legal Analyses
    Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint

  14. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 39,131 times   321 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

  15. Section 21 - Branding grades on barrels of apples

    21 U.S.C. § 21   Cited 908 times   9 Legal Analyses

    The barrels in which apples are packed in accordance with the provisions of sections 20 to 23 of this title may be branded in accordance with the provisions of section 20 of this title. 21 U.S.C. § 21 Aug. 3, 1912, ch. 273, §3, 37 Stat. 251.

  16. Section 352 - Misbranded drugs and devices

    21 U.S.C. § 352   Cited 740 times   73 Legal Analyses
    Setting labeling requirements for drug products

  17. Section 1345.09 - Private causes of action

    Ohio Rev. Code § 1345.09   Cited 608 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Providing for recovery of the larger of three times the amount of actual damages or $200

  18. Section 10-1-399 - [Effective Until 7/1/2024] Civil or equitable remedies by individuals

    Ga. Code § 10-1-399   Cited 155 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing that "exemplary damages shall be awarded only in cases of intentional violation"

  19. Section 8-19-10 - Private right of action

    Ala. Code § 8-19-10   Cited 80 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing that "a reasonable attorney's fee" may be recovered in "any successful [DTPA] action"

  20. Section 1451 - Congressional declaration of policy

    15 U.S.C. § 1451   Cited 46 times   8 Legal Analyses

    Informed consumers are essential to the fair and efficient functioning of a free market economy. Packages and their labels should enable consumers to obtain accurate information as to the quantity of the contents and should facilitate value comparisons. Therefore, it is hereby declared to be the policy of the Congress to assist consumers and manufacturers in reaching these goals in the marketing of consumer goods. 15 U.S.C. § 1451 Pub. L. 89-755, §2, Nov. 3, 1966, 80 Stat. 1296. STATUTORY NOTES AND

  21. Section 100.100 - Misleading containers

    21 C.F.R. § 100.100   Cited 43 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Defining misbranded food containers