§Why CasetextPricing

Guttmann v. Nissin Foods (U.S.A.) Company, Inc.

MOTION to Dismiss Class Action Complaint Pursuant to Rules 12

46 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 253,227 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 267,097 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. Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs. (TOC), Inc.

    528 U.S. 167 (2000)   Cited 7,162 times   25 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiffs who curtailed their recreational activities on a river due to reasonable concerns about the effect of pollutant discharges into that river had standing

  4. Clapper v. Amnesty Int'l USA

    568 U.S. 398 (2013)   Cited 3,064 times   169 Legal Analyses
    Holding that respondents could not establish injury by relying on a "speculative chain of possibilities"

  5. Cel-Tech Communications, Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co.

    20 Cal.4th 163 (Cal. 1999)   Cited 2,422 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Holding that for an act to be "unfair," it must "threaten" a violation of law or "violate the policy or spirit of one of those laws because its effects are comparable to or the same as a violation of the law"

  6. Pom Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co.

    573 U.S. 102 (2014)   Cited 328 times   31 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the FDCA did not bar a Lanham Act claim alleging that a "Pomegranate-Blueberry" juice blend was misleadingly labeled because it contained only 0.3% pomegranate juice and 0.2% blueberry juice

  7. Daugherty v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc.

    144 Cal.App.4th 824 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 564 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding plaintiff failed to plead a fraudulent omission where "no representation was made to which the alleged concealment was contrary"

  8. Roberts v. Corrothers

    812 F.2d 1173 (9th Cir. 1987)   Cited 830 times
    Holding that a court may not resolve genuinely disputed facts where "the question of jurisdiction is dependent on the resolution of factual issues going to the merits"

  9. Birdsong v. Apple

    590 F.3d 955 (9th Cir. 2009)   Cited 318 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that hypothetical injury was insufficient for standing

  10. Hall v. Time Inc.

    158 Cal.App.4th 847 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 258 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a plaintiff has standing under the UCL "only if he or she 'has suffered injury in fact,' and 'has lost money or property as a result of the unfair competition'"

  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 346,412 times   923 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Section 301 - Short title

    21 U.S.C. § 301   Cited 2,428 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

  13. Section 321 - Definitions; generally

    21 U.S.C. § 321   Cited 1,167 times   165 Legal Analyses
    Defining “new drug”

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

    Cal. Com. Code § 2313   Cited 367 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 2314 - Implied warranty: merchantability; usage of trade

    Cal. Com. Code § 2314   Cited 320 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Adopting and codifying Uniform Commercial Code § 2-314

  16. Section 1791.1 - Implied warranty of merchantability; implied warranty of fitness

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1791.1   Cited 301 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Extending express warranty remedies to implied warranty

  17. Section 3480 - Public nuisance

    Cal. Civ. Code § 3480   Cited 277 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Defining public nuisance as one which "affects at the same time an entire community or neighborhood, or any considerable number of persons"

  18. Section 601 - Definitions

    21 U.S.C. § 601   Cited 178 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Defining "misbranded" meat product in part as one with "labeling is false or misleading in any particular"

  19. Section 3493 - Action maintained by private person

    Cal. Civ. Code § 3493   Cited 145 times
    Permitting a private person to bring an action for public nuisance "if it is specially injurious to himself"

  20. Section 3482 - Express authority of statute

    Cal. Civ. Code § 3482   Cited 109 times
    Stating nothing "done or maintained under the express authority of a statute can be deemed a nuisance"

  21. Section 101.9 - Nutrition labeling of food

    21 C.F.R. § 101.9   Cited 139 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

  22. Section 170.30 - Eligibility for classification as generally recognized as safe (GRAS)

    21 C.F.R. § 170.30   Cited 11 times   7 Legal Analyses
    In 21 C.F.R. § 170.30, the FDA establishes how a food additive may be classified as GRAS and notes, in 21 C.F.R. § 182.1(a) and (d), that "[i]t is impracticable to list all substances that are [GRAS] for their intended use" but that many substances that are GRAS "are listed in this part."

  23. Section 184.1555 - Rapeseed oil

    21 C.F.R. § 184.1555   Cited 2 times   1 Legal Analyses

    (a)Fully hydrogenated rapeseed oil. (1) Fully hydrogenated rapeseed oil is a mixture of triglycerides in which the fatty acid composition is a mixture of saturated fatty acids. The fatty acids are present in the same porportions which result from the full hydrogenation of fatty acids occurring in natural rapeseed oil. The rapeseed oil is obtained from the napus and campestris varieties of Brassica of the family Cruciferae. It is prepared by fully hydrogenating refined and bleached rapeseed oil at

  24. Section 319.702 - Lard, leaf lard

    9 C.F.R. § 319.702

    (a) Lard is the fat rendered from clean and sound edible tissues from swine. The tissues may be fresh, frozen, cooked, or prepared by other processes approved by the Administrator in specific cases, upon his determination that the use of such processes will not result in the adulteration or misbranding of the lard. The tissues shall be reasonably free from blood, and shall not include stomachs, livers, spleens, kidneys, and brains, or settlings and skimmings. "Leaf Lard" is lard prepared from fresh