§Why CasetextPricing

Edward Makaron v. Enagic USA, Inc.

REPLY in Support of NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case 18

11 Cited authorities

  1. Van Buskirk v. Cable News Network, Inc.

    284 F.3d 977 (9th Cir. 2002)   Cited 1,010 times
    Holding that the Ninth Circuit's "incorporation by reference" rule allows a court to look beyond the face of the complaint without converting a Rule 12(b) motion to dismiss to a motion for summary judgment

  2. Reardon v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

    115 F. Supp. 3d 1090 (N.D. Cal. 2015)   Cited 30 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that text messages sent by Uber to potential drivers are not advertisements sent with the purpose to promote a good or service

  3. Murphy v. DCI Biologicals Orlando, LLC

    Case No: 6:12-cv-1459-Orl-36KRS (M.D. Fla. Dec. 31, 2013)   Cited 14 times
    In Murphy v. DCI Biologicals Orlando, LLC, 2013 WL 6865772, at **9-10 (M.D.Fla. Dec. 31, 2013) the court relied on 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(f)(14) (defining a "telephone solicitation") ("§ 1200(f)(14)") to conclude that defendant's text messages soliciting plaintiff to sell his blood to defendant did not constitute a "telephone solicitation," as defined in § 1200(f)(14), because it was not for the purpose of encouraging "the purchase or rental of, or investment in property, goods, or services."

  4. Friedman v. Torchmark Corp.

    CASE NO. 12-CV-2837-IEG (BGS) (S.D. Cal. Aug. 13, 2013)   Cited 8 times
    Finding no TCPA violation where the prerecorded message at issue did not promote or encourage the sale of the defendant's products or sales contacts database but rather informed recipients of the opportunity to enter into an independent contractor position as a sales agent for the defendant

  5. Al & Po Corp. v. Med-Care Diabetic & Med. Supplies, Inc.

    No. 14 C 01893 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 10, 2014)   Cited 6 times
    Finding that, for purposes of the TCPA, "drawing attention to a job opening does not equate to promoting the 'commercial availability or quality of any property, goods, or services'" (quoting 47 U.S.C. § 227(a))

  6. Lutz Appellate Services, Inc. v. Curry

    859 F. Supp. 180 (E.D. Pa. 1994)   Cited 21 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding that the fact that a recipient may apply for the job offered did not alter the informational nature of the fax

  7. Dolemba v. Ill. Farmers Ins. Co.

    No. 15 C 463 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 10, 2015)   Cited 1 times
    In Dolemba, the court thoroughly examined numerous cases to determine whether the call at issue constituted telemarketing.

  8. 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 361,487 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

  9. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 163,896 times   197 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

  10. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 40,128 times   335 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

  11. Section 227 - Restrictions on use of telephone equipment

    47 U.S.C. § 227   Cited 5,811 times   744 Legal Analyses
    Granting exclusive jurisdiction to federal courts over actions brought by state attorney generals