57 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 267,813 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 280,791 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
Medimmune, Inc. v. GenenTech, Inc.
549 U.S. 118 (2007) Cited 2,663 times 91 Legal Analyses
Holding "the phrase 'case of actual controversy' in the Act refers to the types of 'Cases' and 'Controversies' that are justiciable under Article III"
BEK CONSTR. CO. v. NLRB
536 U.S. 516 (2002) Cited 313 times 14 Legal Analyses
Holding that the First Amendment right to petition the government extends to the courts
Greebel v. FTP Software, Inc.
194 F.3d 185 (1st Cir. 1999) Cited 526 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding plaintiffs' failure to provide information regarding sales made by insiders at times outside the class period permitted no possibility of comparison
Murphy v. U.S.
45 F.3d 520 (1st Cir. 1995) Cited 579 times
Holding that a plaintiff may not rely on unsupported conclusions or interpretations of law in responding to a motion to dismiss under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b) (citing Washington Legal Found. v. Massachusetts Bar Found., 993 F.2d 962, 971 (1st Cir. 1993))
Sandisk v. Stmicroelectronics
480 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007) Cited 315 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that "where a patentee asserts rights under a patent based on certain identified ongoing or planned activity of another party, and where that party contends that it has the right to engage in the accused activity without license, an Article III case or controversy will arise"
Theme Promotions v. News America Marketing Fsi
539 F.3d 1046 (9th Cir. 2008) Cited 223 times
Holding that suit was not objectively baseless where it was "potentially meritorious"
North American Catholic Educ. v. Cardinale
567 F.3d 8 (1st Cir. 2009) Cited 205 times
Holding that the particularity requirement applies not only to actual fraud claims but also to "associated claims where the core allegations effectively charge fraud"
Universal v. Lycos
478 F.3d 413 (1st Cir. 2007) Cited 164 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that website operator did not become information content provider “merely because the ‘construct and operation’ of the web site might have some influence on the content of the postings” or because website simply “provided ‘culpable assistance’ to subscribers wishing to disseminate misinformation”
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 362,607 times 962 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 164,455 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 9 - Pleading Special Matters
Fed. R. Civ. P. 9 Cited 40,207 times 337 Legal Analyses
Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity
Section 2201 - Creation of remedy
28 U.S.C. § 2201 Cited 25,173 times 63 Legal Analyses
Granting district courts the authority to create a remedy with the force of a final judgment
Section 281 - Remedy for infringement of patent
35 U.S.C. § 281 Cited 660 times 23 Legal Analyses
Providing that " patentee shall have remedy by civil action for infringement of his patent"
Section 100 - Definitions
35 U.S.C. § 100 Cited 622 times 100 Legal Analyses
Defining a " ‘joint research agreement’ " as a written agreement between "2 or more persons or entities"

ConforMIS, Inc. v. Acacia Research Group LLC et al

57 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 "the phrase 'case of actual controversy' in the Act refers to the types of 'Cases' and 'Controversies' that are justiciable under Article III"

Holding that the First Amendment right to petition the government extends to the courts

Holding plaintiffs' failure to provide information regarding sales made by insiders at times outside the class period permitted no possibility of comparison

Holding that a plaintiff may not rely on unsupported conclusions or interpretations of law in responding to a motion to dismiss under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b) (citing Washington Legal Found. v. Massachusetts Bar Found., 993 F.2d 962, 971 (1st Cir. 1993))

Holding that "where a patentee asserts rights under a patent based on certain identified ongoing or planned activity of another party, and where that party contends that it has the right to engage in the accused activity without license, an Article III case or controversy will arise"

Holding that suit was not objectively baseless where it was "potentially meritorious"

Holding that the particularity requirement applies not only to actual fraud claims but also to "associated claims where the core allegations effectively charge fraud"

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. . . ."

Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

Granting district courts the authority to create a remedy with the force of a final judgment

Providing that " patentee shall have remedy by civil action for infringement of his patent"

Defining a " ‘joint research agreement’ " as a written agreement between "2 or more persons or entities"