§Why CasetextPricing

Delacruz v. Cytosport, Inc.

MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint

46 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 266,946 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 279,983 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. New Hampshire v. Maine

    532 U.S. 742 (2001)   Cited 4,674 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding that under the doctrine of judicial estoppel, “New Hampshire is equitably barred from asserting—contrary to its position in the 1970's litigation—that the inland Piscataqua River boundary runs along the Maine shore”

  4. Buckman Co. v. Plaintiffs' Legal Committee

    531 U.S. 341 (2001)   Cited 1,217 times   84 Legal Analyses
    Holding that federal drug and medical device laws pre-empted a state tort-law claim based on failure to properly communicate with the FDA

  5. Navarro v. Block

    250 F.3d 729 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 5,814 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that dismissal is proper where there is "an absence of sufficient facts alleged to support a cognizable legal theory"

  6. Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USA

    317 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 4,359 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

  7. Kearns v. Ford Motor Co.

    567 F.3d 1120 (9th Cir. 2009)   Cited 2,352 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that circumstances constituting fraud must be stated with particularity

  8. Gade v. National Solid Wastes Management Ass'n

    505 U.S. 88 (1992)   Cited 915 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "nonapproved state regulation of occupational safety and health issues for which a federal standard is in effect is impliedly preempted" by OSHA's standard

  9. In re Tobacco II Cases

    46 Cal.4th 298 (Cal. 2009)   Cited 1,229 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Holding class representatives had standing to challenge common marketing of cigarettes despite differences in the advertisements or statements on which class members relied

  10. 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"

  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. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

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

  14. Section 21 - Branding grades on barrels of apples

    21 U.S.C. § 21   Cited 1,069 times   11 Legal Analyses

    The barrels in which apples are packed in accordance with the provisions of sections 20 to 23 of this title may be branded in accordance with the provisions of section 20 of this title. 21 U.S.C. § 21 Aug. 3, 1912, ch. 273, §3, 37 Stat. 251.

  15. Section 337 - Proceedings in name of United States; provision as to subpoenas

    21 U.S.C. § 337   Cited 694 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Providing that suits to enforce the FDCA generally must be brought "by and in the name of the United States"

  16. Section 343 - Misbranded food

    21 U.S.C. § 343   Cited 588 times   61 Legal Analyses
    Setting labeling requirements for food products

  17. Section 101.13 - Nutrient content claims-general principles

    21 C.F.R. § 101.13   Cited 171 times   11 Legal Analyses
    In 21 C.F.R. § 101.13, the FDA lists general principles regulating nutrient content claims-claims that expressly or implicitly characterize the level of a nutrient.

  18. Section 101.9 - Nutrition labeling of food

    21 C.F.R. § 101.9   Cited 149 times   47 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that "Vitamin C" and "Ascorbic acid" are "synonym" that may be used in the alternative in a product's nutritional information labeling

  19. Section 10.25 - Initiation of administrative proceedings

    21 C.F.R. § 10.25   Cited 82 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Including forms under 21 C.F.R. § 314.50 among the forms that constitute a "petition"

  20. Section 101.65 - Implied nutrient content claims and related label statements

    21 C.F.R. § 101.65   Cited 44 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Defining nutrient content claim

  21. Section 172.831 - Sucralose

    21 C.F.R. § 172.831   Cited 2 times

    (a) Sucralose is the chemical 1,6-dichloro-1,6-dideoxy-[BETA]-D-fructofuranosyl-4-chloro-4-deoxy-[ALPHA]-D-galactopyranoside (CAS Reg. No. 56038-13-2). (b) The additive meets the specifications of the Food Chemicals Codex, 7th ed. (2010), pp. 993-995, which is incorporated by reference. The Director of the Office of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You may obtain copies from the United States Pharmacopeial Convention

  22. Section 172.800 - Acesulfame potassium

    21 C.F.R. § 172.800   Cited 1 times

    Acesulfame potassium (CAS Reg. No. 55589-62-3), also known as acesulfame K, may be safely used as a general-purpose sweetener and flavor enhancer in foods generally, except in meat and poultry, in accordance with current good manufacturing practice and in an amount not to exceed that reasonably required to accomplish the intended technical effect in foods for which standards of identity established under section 401 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act do not preclude such use, under the following