§Why CasetextPricing

Dana Bostick v. Herbalife International of America Inc et al

REPLY in support of MOTION for Order for Granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Complaint Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 8, 9

52 Cited authorities

  1. Arbaugh v. Y H Corp.

    546 U.S. 500 (2006)   Cited 8,325 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Title VII's numerosity requirement is nonjurisdictional even though it serves the important policy goal of “spar[ing] very small businesses from Title VII liability”

  2. Carnegie-Mellon Univ. v. Cohill

    484 U.S. 343 (1988)   Cited 12,115 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding district courts have discretion whether to dismiss state law claims after all the federal claims are dismissed and explaining the factors courts should consider when doing so

  3. Swartz v. KPMG LLP

    476 F.3d 756 (9th Cir. 2007)   Cited 2,949 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “[t]o the extent Swartz seeks a declaration of defendants' liability for damages sought for his other causes of action,” claim must be dismissed as “merely duplicative”

  4. Williams v. Gerber Products

    552 F.3d 934 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 971 times   36 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "reasonable consumers expect that the ingredient list ... confirms other representations on the packaging"

  5. Davis v. HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A.

    691 F.3d 1152 (9th Cir. 2012)   Cited 682 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a "district court's decision to incorporate by reference documents into complaint shall be reviewed for an abuse of discretion"

  6. Herman Family Revocable Trust v. Teddy Bear

    254 F.3d 802 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 499 times
    Holding that "supplemental jurisdiction cannot exist without original jurisdiction."

  7. Freeman v. Time, Inc.

    68 F.3d 285 (9th Cir. 1995)   Cited 338 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that promotional mailers for sweepstakes were not likely to deceive reasonable consumers because the mailers themselves contained qualifying language

  8. O'Connor v. Nevada

    27 F.3d 357 (9th Cir. 1994)   Cited 282 times
    Noting that certain ballot access restrictions are subject to heightened scrutiny

  9. Citizens for Open Access etc. Tide, Inc. v. Seadrift Assn.

    60 Cal.App.4th 1053 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 234 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a settlement agreement between state agencies and a housing association that owned beachfront property resolving public claims to beach access was res judicata to a later action brought by a public interest group seeking access to the beach on behalf of the public; plaintiff asserted no other direct interest or injuries to their private property rights

  10. City Equities Anaheim, Ltd. v. Lincoln Plaza Development Co. (In re City Equities Anaheim, Ltd.)

    22 F.3d 954 (9th Cir. 1994)   Cited 230 times
    Holding summary enforcement improper where material facts disputed

  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 361,663 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. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 163,974 times   197 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

  13. Section 1331 - Federal question

    28 U.S.C. § 1331   Cited 100,904 times   140 Legal Analyses
    Finding that in order to invoke federal question jurisdiction, a plaintiff's claims must arise "under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."

  14. Section 1367 - Supplemental jurisdiction

    28 U.S.C. § 1367   Cited 64,948 times   81 Legal Analyses
    Holding that in civil actions proceeding in federal court based solely on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the district court "shall not have supplemental jurisdiction" over "claims by plaintiffs against persons made parties under Rule . . . 24" or "over claims by persons . . seeking to intervene as plaintiffs under Rule 24," if "exercising supplemental jurisdiction over such claims would be inconsistent with the jurisdictional requirements of section 1332"

  15. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 40,144 times   335 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

  16. Section 17200 - Unfair competition defined

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200   Cited 18,412 times   316 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting unlawful business practices

  17. Section 1962 - Prohibited activities

    18 U.S.C. § 1962   Cited 16,275 times   61 Legal Analyses
    Specifying prohibited activities

  18. Section 1964 - Civil remedies

    18 U.S.C. § 1964   Cited 6,239 times   43 Legal Analyses
    Granting civil remedies for RICO violation

  19. Section 1692 - Relief based upon rescission

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1692   Cited 197 times   1 Legal Analyses

    When a contract has been rescinded in whole or in part, any party to the contract may seek relief based upon such rescission by (a) bringing an action to recover any money or thing owing to him by any other party to the contract as a consequence of such rescission or for any other relief to which he may be entitled under the circumstances or (b) asserting such rescission by way of defense or cross-complaint. If in an action or proceeding a party seeks relief based upon rescission and the court determines

  20. Section 327 - Endless chain

    Cal. Pen. Code § 327   Cited 29 times

    Every person who contrives, prepares, sets up, proposes, or operates any endless chain is guilty of a public offense, and is punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year or in state prison for 16 months, two, or three years. As used in this section, an "endless chain" means any scheme for the disposal or distribution of property whereby a participant pays a valuable consideration for the chance to receive compensation for introducing one or more additional persons into participation