§Why CasetextPricing

In re: Google Inc. Street View Electronic Communications Litigation

MOTION to Dismiss

44 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. Tellabs v. Makor Issues Rights

    551 U.S. 308 (2007)   Cited 9,131 times   104 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a strong inference is one that is "cogent and at least as compelling as any opposing inference"

  4. Connecticut Nat. Bank v. Germain

    503 U.S. 249 (1992)   Cited 2,701 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that § 1292 applies also to bankruptcy jurisdiction and is not displaced by § 158(d)

  5. United States v. Santos

    553 U.S. 507 (2008)   Cited 951 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that when the government alleges that the defendant laundered the "proceeds" of an illegal gambling business, the government must prove that the laundering transactions involved the profits of the business, rather than its gross receipts

  6. Buckman Co. v. Plaintiffs' Legal Committee

    531 U.S. 341 (2001)   Cited 1,184 times   80 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

  7. Knievel v. ESPN

    393 F.3d 1068 (9th Cir. 2005)   Cited 2,318 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that incorporation by reference doctrine extends “to situations in which the plaintiff's claim depends on the contents of a document, the defendant attaches the document to its motion to dismiss, and the parties do not dispute the authenticity of the document, even though the plaintiff does not explicitly allege the contents of that document in the complaint”

  8. Leadsinger, Inc. v. BMG Music Publishing

    512 F.3d 522 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 1,371 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a court may deny leave to amend where amendment would be futile

  9. Bartnicki v. Vopper

    532 U.S. 514 (2001)   Cited 285 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding unconstitutional the prohibition on disclosure of illegally intercepted conversation even though the initial step in the disclosure process, the interception, was illegal and harmful to those whose privacy was invaded

  10. Snow v. Directv, Inc.

    450 F.3d 1314 (11th Cir. 2006)   Cited 701 times
    Holding that the plaintiff's "vague and conclusory allegations" presented in his complaint were insufficient to establish a prima facie case of personal jurisdiction over a defendant

  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 17200 - Unfair competition defined

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200   Cited 17,850 times   315 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting unlawful business practices

  13. Section 2510 - Definitions

    18 U.S.C. § 2510   Cited 4,254 times   79 Legal Analyses
    Defining "[i]nvestigative or law enforcement officer" as an officer "empowered by law to conduct investigations of or to make arrests for [certain] offenses . . . and any attorney authorized by law to prosecute or participate in the prosecution of such offenses"

  14. Section 2518 - Procedure for interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications

    18 U.S.C. § 2518   Cited 2,897 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that some investigative techniques may be “too dangerous”

  15. Section 2511 - Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited

    18 U.S.C. § 2511   Cited 2,784 times   42 Legal Analyses
    Imposing a penalty on persons who “intentionally intercept ... any wire, oral, or electronic communication”

  16. Section 2520 - Recovery of civil damages authorized

    18 U.S.C. § 2520   Cited 1,345 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Permitting recovery of actual and punitive damages, as well as a reasonable attorney's fee and other costs of litigation reasonably incurred

  17. Section 2515 - Prohibition of use as evidence of intercepted wire or oral communications

    18 U.S.C. § 2515   Cited 741 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Codifying the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine for wiretapping evidence

  18. Section 2512 - Manufacture, distribution, possession, and advertising of wire, oral, or electronic communication intercepting devices prohibited

    18 U.S.C. § 2512   Cited 352 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting the assembly or possession of a device used for "surreptitious interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications"