§Why CasetextPricing

David Velasco et al v. Paccar Inc et al

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case Plaintiffs' Third Amended Class Action Complaint

53 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 267,684 times   281 Legal Analyses
    Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint

  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 280,676 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

  3. Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors

    266 F.3d 979 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 5,302 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that unwarranted inferences are insufficient to defeat a motion to dismiss

  4. Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USA

    317 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 4,368 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Rule 9(b) pleading standards apply to California CLRA, FAL, and UCL claims because, though fraud is not an essential element of those statutes, a plaintiff alleges a fraudulent course of conduct as the basis of those claims

  5. Shroyer v. New Cingular Wireless Services

    622 F.3d 1035 (9th Cir. 2010)   Cited 1,483 times
    Holding that fraud claims were pled with particularity when the allegations concerned a "relatively definite time frame" identifiable by discrete events, even though exact dates were not provided

  6. Wilson v. Hewlett–Packard Co.

    668 F.3d 1136 (9th Cir. 2012)   Cited 846 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that where a defendant has not made an affirmative misrepresentation, a plaintiff must allege the existence of an unreasonable safety hazard and a causal connection between the defect and the hazard

  7. Clemens v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.

    530 F.3d 852 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 938 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "claims under the Magnuson–Moss Act stand or fall with express and implied warranty claims under state law"

  8. Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors

    275 F.3d 1187 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 670 times
    Affirming district court's order dismissing a petition to vacate under Rule 12(b) on the basis that the arbitrator's decision drew its essence from the CBA

  9. Fresno Motors, LLC v. Mercedes Benz USA, LLC

    771 F.3d 1119 (9th Cir. 2014)   Cited 408 times
    Holding that the record "demonstrate that MB[USA] timely and lawfully exercised its ROFR" on June 15, 2009

  10. Southland Sod Farms v. Stover Seed Co.

    108 F.3d 1134 (9th Cir. 1997)   Cited 708 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that defendants cannot be liable for false advertising when they were not "responsible for disseminating the offending advertisements"

  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 362,493 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

  12. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 164,394 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. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 40,200 times   336 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

  14. Section 2313 - Express warranties by affirmation, promise, description, sample

    Cal. Com. Code § 2313   Cited 386 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Stating that an express warranty is a "promise made by the seller to the buyer which relates to the goods"

  15. Section 2725 - Statute of limitations in contracts for sale

    Cal. Com. Code § 2725   Cited 148 times
    Providing four-year limitations period for breach of express warranty claims