§Why CasetextPricing

In re: HP Inkjet Printer Litigation

Memorandum in Opposition re MOTION for Settlement PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES and Reply in Support of 263 Objection

29 Cited authorities

  1. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

    509 U.S. 579 (1993)   Cited 26,449 times   228 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a trial judge must ensure that all admitted expert testimony "is not only relevant, but reliable"

  2. Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael

    526 U.S. 137 (1999)   Cited 12,687 times   30 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Daubert gatekeeping standard applies not only to "scientific testimony" but also to "all expert testimony"

  3. General Electric Co. v. Joiner

    522 U.S. 136 (1997)   Cited 4,892 times   42 Legal Analyses
    Holding that under the abuse of discretion standard the appellate court will not reverse unless the ruling is manifestly erroneous

  4. Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp.

    150 F.3d 1011 (9th Cir. 1998)   Cited 3,067 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that " common nucleus of facts and potential legal remedies dominate[d]" over "idiosyncratic differences between state consumer protection laws" where a nationwide class of minivan buyers’ claims turned on "questions of [the manufacturer’s] prior knowledge of the [vehicle’s] deficiency, the design defect, and a damages remedy"

  5. Brooke Group Ltd. v. Brown Williamson Tobacco Corp.

    509 U.S. 209 (1993)   Cited 730 times   19 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "tacit collusion" of participants in oligopolistic market to raise prices in response to higher costs is "not in itself unlawful"

  6. Weisgram v. Marley Co.

    528 U.S. 440 (2000)   Cited 349 times
    Holding that a district court, when considering post-trial motions for judgment as a matter of law, may disregard "testimony erroneously admitted"

  7. In re Gen. Motors Corp. Pick-Up Truck Fuel Tank

    55 F.3d 768 (3d Cir. 1995)   Cited 1,145 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that nothing in Rule 23 "can be read to authorize separate, liberalized criteria for settlement classes"

  8. In re Mercury Interactive Corp.

    618 F.3d 988 (9th Cir. 2010)   Cited 424 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that under Rule 23(h), class members must be given a full and fair opportunity to examine and object to attorneys' fees motion

  9. Concord Boat Corp. v. Brunswick Corp.

    207 F.3d 1039 (8th Cir. 2000)   Cited 255 times
    Holding that "[b]ecause of the deficiencies in the foundation of the opinion, the expert's resulting conclusions were mere speculation"

  10. Zimmerman v. State of Oregon Dept. of Just

    170 F.3d 1169 (9th Cir. 1999)   Cited 259 times
    Holding that Title II of the ADA does abrogate state sovereign immunity, but its protections do not apply to employment

  11. Rule 11 - Signing Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to the Court; Sanctions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 11   Cited 36,021 times   145 Legal Analyses
    Holding an "unrepresented party" to the same standard as an attorney

  12. Rule 23 - Class Actions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 23   Cited 35,135 times   1237 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, to certify a class, the court must find that "questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members"

  13. Section 501 - Exemption from tax on corporations, certain trusts, etc

    26 U.S.C. § 501   Cited 3,233 times   293 Legal Analyses
    Granting tax-exempt status to qualified pension plans

  14. Section 1711 - Definitions

    28 U.S.C. § 1711   Cited 243 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Defining other terms but not defining "coupon"

  15. Section 1712 - Coupon settlements

    28 U.S.C. § 1712   Cited 147 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Providing that "the portion of any attorney's fee award to class counsel that is attributable to the award of the coupons shall be based on the value to class members of the coupons that are redeemed"