§Why CasetextPricing

David Takeda v. Quest Nutrition LLC et al

MEMORANDUM in Support of MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings as to Complaint Based On The Primary Jurisdiction Doctrine 42

16 Cited authorities

  1. Daniels-Hall v. National Educ. Ass'n

    629 F.3d 992 (9th Cir. 2010)   Cited 2,103 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding courts may take judicial notice of information made publicly available by government entities on government websites

  2. L-7 Designs, Inc. v. Old Navy, LLC

    647 F.3d 419 (2d Cir. 2011)   Cited 1,211 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that on a motion for judgment on the pleadings, a court may, in addition to the complaint itself, consider "any written instrument attached to it as an exhibit, materials incorporated in it by reference, and documents that, although not incorporated by reference, are ‘integral to the complaint"

  3. Clark v. Cable

    523 F.3d 1110 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 294 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an action by a telephone user against a cable operator was within the primary jurisdiction of the F.C.C.

  4. Heliotrope General, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.

    189 F.3d 971 (9th Cir. 1999)   Cited 360 times
    Holding where allegedly omitted information was part of the "total mix of information" available, plaintiff could not state a claim under § 10b

  5. Syntek Semiconductor Co. v. Microchip Tech., Inc.

    307 F.3d 775 (9th Cir. 2002)   Cited 238 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that cancellation of a copyright registration is an administrative remedy that must be sought from the Copyright Office

  6. Davel Commc'n, Inc. v. Qwest Corp.

    451 F.3d 1037 (9th Cir. 2006)   Cited 105 times
    Holding that "where . . . the allegations of the complaint do not necessarily require the doctrine's applicability, then the primary jurisdiction doctrine may not be applied on a motion to dismiss"

  7. In re Amgen Inc. Securities Litigation

    544 F. Supp. 2d 1009 (C.D. Cal. 2008)   Cited 76 times
    Holding that the group pleading presumption does not apply after the passage of the PSLRA

  8. Morgan v. County of Yolo

    436 F. Supp. 2d 1152 (E.D. Cal. 2006)   Cited 56 times
    Noting that a court may consider materials subject to judicial notice in ruling upon a motion for judgment on the pleadings

  9. Astiana v. the Hain Celestial Group, Inc.

    905 F. Supp. 2d 1013 (N.D. Cal. 2012)   Cited 31 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[i]n absence of any FDA rules or regulations (or even informal policy statements) . . . the court declines to make any independent determination of whether [the label] was false or misleading" and the claims were barred under the primary jurisdiction doctrine

  10. Figy v. Lifeway Foods, Inc.

    Case No. 13-cv-04828-TEH (N.D. Cal. May. 5, 2014)   Cited 8 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Noting that the FDA is likely to make a final pronouncement on the issue of ECJ labeling, and that such likelihood of resolution supports deferring judgment

  11. Section 10.30 - Citizen petition

    21 C.F.R. § 10.30   Cited 140 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Describing the requirements for filing a citizens' petition