§Why CasetextPricing

Dalmatia Import Group, Inc. v. Foodmatch, Inc. et al

MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM

13 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 251,119 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 265,111 times   364 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. Landgraf v. USI Film Prods.

    511 U.S. 244 (1994)   Cited 3,788 times   32 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a statute may apply retroactively when "clear congressional intent favor such a result"

  4. Iles v. de Jongh

    638 F.3d 169 (3d Cir. 2011)   Cited 89 times
    Explaining that "a state employee may be sued in his official capacity only for prospective injunctive relief, because official-capacity actions for prospective relief are not treated as actions against the State."

  5. REX MEDICAL L.P. v. ANGIOTECH PHARMACEUTICALS

    754 F. Supp. 2d 616 (S.D.N.Y. 2010)   Cited 67 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "being forced to comply with contractual obligations that a party voluntarily entered into is simply not the sort of 'damage' that is compensable at law"

  6. Ancile Inv. Co. Ltd. v. Archer Daniels Midland Co.

    784 F. Supp. 2d 296 (S.D.N.Y. 2011)   Cited 33 times
    Finding that an implied contract requires contractual elements and inference that the parties intended to agree

  7. Kania v. Potter

    358 F. App'x 338 (3d Cir. 2009)   Cited 24 times
    Finding that speculation “is insufficient to defeat summary judgment”

  8. Tax Matrix Technologies, LLC v. Wegmans Food Markets, Inc.

    154 F. Supp. 3d 157 (E.D. Pa. 2016)   Cited 12 times
    Allowing contract claim to proceed in case where "the parties continued to move forward with multiple projects governed by" the contract "even after th[e] case was filed"

  9. Hardee-Guerra v. Shire Pharmaceuticals

    737 F. Supp. 2d 318 (E.D. Pa. 2010)   Cited 14 times
    Reiterating presumption of at-will employment

  10. Innovative Biodefense, Inc. v. VSP Techs., Inc.

    12 Civ. 3710 (ER) (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 3, 2013)   Cited 11 times

    12 Civ. 3710 (ER) 07-03-2013 INNOVATIVE BIODEFENSE, INC., Plaintiff, v. VSP TECHNOLOGIES, INC., SAN-MAR LABORATORIES, INC., and CARLO MICCERI Defendants. Edgardo Ramos, U.S.D.J. OPINION AND ORDER This action stems from a series of contracts governing the sublicense of patented technology used to manufacture hand sanitizer. Defendant VSP Technologies, Inc. ("VSP") holds the master license to the intellectual property, and Plaintiff Innovative BioDefense, Inc. ("Plaintiff" or "IBD") currently holds

  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 344,113 times   920 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss