§Why CasetextPricing

George Alvarez et al v. Abbvie, Inc. et al

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case

53 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 252,626 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

  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 266,542 times   365 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' "

  3. Food & Drug Administration v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.

    529 U.S. 120 (2000)   Cited 1,504 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Congress had not yet empowered the FDA to regulate tobacco products

  4. Pliva, Inc. v. Mensing

    564 U.S. 604 (2011)   Cited 745 times   143 Legal Analyses
    Holding that state tort law that required generic drug manufacturers to provide adequate warning labels was preempted where federal law required manufacturers to use the same labels as their brand-name counterparts

  5. Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors

    266 F.3d 979 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 5,063 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that unwarranted inferences are insufficient to defeat a motion to dismiss

  6. Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USA

    317 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 4,199 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. Cahill v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.

    80 F.3d 336 (9th Cir. 1996)   Cited 3,300 times
    Holding that allegations of material fact are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to plaintiff

  8. Mut. Pharm. Co. v. Bartlett

    570 U.S. 472 (2013)   Cited 415 times   67 Legal Analyses
    Holding "state-law design-defect claims that turn on the adequacy of a drug's warnings are pre-empted by federal law under PLIVA"

  9. Whittlestone, Inc. v. Handi-Craft Co.

    618 F.3d 970 (9th Cir. 2010)   Cited 1,316 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b) is the appropriate means of disposing of an improper claim for relief

  10. Korea Supply Co. v. Lockheed Martin Corp.

    29 Cal.4th 1134 (Cal. 2003)   Cited 1,655 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiff cannot recover damages under Cal. Bus. Prof. Code § 17200 unless plaintiff has "an ownership interest in the money it seeks to recover"

  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 345,805 times   922 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 156,162 times   193 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

  13. Section 1332 - Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs

    28 U.S.C. § 1332   Cited 111,339 times   572 Legal Analyses
    Holding district court has jurisdiction over action between diverse citizens "where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000"

  14. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 38,918 times   316 Legal Analyses
    Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"

  15. Section 3294 - When damages recoverable for sake of example and by way of punishment; employer liability for acts of employee; death from homicide

    Cal. Civ. Code § 3294   Cited 2,789 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Stating plaintiff may recover punitive damages "in addition to the actual damages"

  16. Section 301 - Short title

    21 U.S.C. § 301   Cited 2,427 times   48 Legal Analyses

    This chapter may be cited as the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. 21 U.S.C. § 301 June 25, 1938, ch. 675, §1, 52 Stat. 1040. STATUTORY NOTES AND RELATED SUBSIDIARIES EFFECTIVE DATE; POSTPONEMENT IN CERTAIN CASES Act June 23, 1939, ch. 242, §§1, 2, 53 Stat. 853, 854, provided that:"[SEC. 1] (a) The effective date of the following provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act is hereby postponed until January 1, 1940: Sections 402(c) [342(c) of this title]; 403(e)(1) [343(e)(1) of this

  17. Section 355 - New drugs

    21 U.S.C. § 355   Cited 2,244 times   337 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"

  18. Section 1021 - Measure and mode of attorney's compensation left to agreement

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1021   Cited 1,179 times
    Providing that a contract may provide for an award of "reasonable attorney's fees"

  19. Section 3333 - Breach of obligation not arising from contract

    Cal. Civ. Code § 3333   Cited 746 times
    Defining damages "[f]or the breach of an obligation not arising from contract" as "the amount which will compensate for all the detriment proximately caused thereby ..."

  20. Section 377.34 - Damages recoverable

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 377.34   Cited 129 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Providing that damages are "limited to the loss or damage that the decedent sustained or incurred before death"

  21. Section 314.70 - Supplements and other changes to an approved NDA

    21 C.F.R. § 314.70   Cited 353 times   37 Legal Analyses
    Defining "major changes" as those "requiring supplement submission and approval prior to distribution of the product"

  22. Section 314.94 - Content and format of an ANDA

    21 C.F.R. § 314.94   Cited 224 times   37 Legal Analyses
    Explaining that products stemming from Drug Efficacy Study Implementation approvals are subject to today's ANDA regulations

  23. Section 314.50 - Content and format of an NDA

    21 C.F.R. § 314.50   Cited 148 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing the proprietary nature of DSD and SP specifications by requiring that each ANDA applicant provide its own distinct specifications

  24. Section 314.150 - Withdrawal of approval of an application or abbreviated application

    21 C.F.R. § 314.150   Cited 87 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Requiring products to be withdrawn from the market where the FDA revokes approval