21 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 251,689 times 279 Legal Analyses
Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 265,662 times 364 Legal Analyses
Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "
Funk v. Stryker Corp.
631 F.3d 777 (5th Cir. 2011) Cited 844 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding court lacked jurisdiction to consider district court's denial of plaintiff's postjudgment motions because he did not file an amended, or separate, notice of appeal
Chavez v. United States
683 F.3d 1102 (9th Cir. 2012) Cited 744 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a Bivens action could be sustained against Border Patrol agents
Sateriale v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.
697 F.3d 777 (9th Cir. 2012) Cited 187 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that because the plaintiffs' UCL and CLRA claims sounded in fraud, they had to prove reliance
United States ex rel. Modglin v. Djo Global Inc.
48 F. Supp. 3d 1362 (C.D. Cal. 2014) Cited 71 times 1 Legal Analyses
Finding the court could take judicial notice of documents from the Food and Drug Administration's website
Gustavson v. Wrigley Sales Co.
961 F. Supp. 2d 1100 (N.D. Cal. 2013) Cited 50 times
Holding the phrase "flavanols [are] found in cocoa" as characterizing the level of flavanols
Eidson v. Medtronic, Inc.
981 F. Supp. 2d 868 (N.D. Cal. 2013) Cited 46 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that claim for loss of consortium is subject to the two-year statute of limitations in Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 335.1
Erickson v. Boston Scientific Corp.
846 F. Supp. 2d 1085 (C.D. Cal. 2011) Cited 43 times
Granting request for judicial notice of FDA's Premarket Approval documents for defendants' pacemaker product
Funk v. Stryker Corp.
673 F. Supp. 2d 522 (S.D. Tex. 2009) Cited 31 times
Holding that a medical device “could have failed for a variety of reasons and therefore its failure did not ‘speak for itself’ and establish the defendants' negligence”
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 344,767 times 920 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 155,637 times 193 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters
Fed. R. Civ. P. 9 Cited 38,845 times 316 Legal Analyses
Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"
Rule 201 - Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts
Fed. R. Evid. 201 Cited 28,180 times 26 Legal Analyses
Holding "[n]ormally, in deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, courts must limit their inquiry to the facts stated in the complaint and the documents either attached to or incorporated in the complaint. However, courts may also consider matters of which they may take judicial notice."
Section 355 - New drugs
21 U.S.C. § 355 Cited 2,241 times 334 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to change the date on which an ANDA may be approved if "either party to the action failed to reasonably cooperate in expediting the action"
Section 321 - Definitions; generally
21 U.S.C. § 321 Cited 1,165 times 158 Legal Analyses
Defining “new drug”

Franz v. Beiersdorf, Inc. et al

21 Cited authorities

Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "

Holding court lacked jurisdiction to consider district court's denial of plaintiff's postjudgment motions because he did not file an amended, or separate, notice of appeal

Holding that a Bivens action could be sustained against Border Patrol agents

Holding that because the plaintiffs' UCL and CLRA claims sounded in fraud, they had to prove reliance

Finding the court could take judicial notice of documents from the Food and Drug Administration's website

Holding the phrase "flavanols [are] found in cocoa" as characterizing the level of flavanols

Holding that claim for loss of consortium is subject to the two-year statute of limitations in Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 335.1

Granting request for judicial notice of FDA's Premarket Approval documents for defendants' pacemaker product

Holding that a medical device “could have failed for a variety of reasons and therefore its failure did not ‘speak for itself’ and establish the defendants' negligence”

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"

Granting the court discretion to change the date on which an ANDA may be approved if "either party to the action failed to reasonably cooperate in expediting the action"

Defining “new drug”