§Why CasetextPricing

In Re: Inphonic, Inc., Wireless Phone Rebate Litigation - MDL-1792

Memorandum in opposition to re MOTION to Dismiss and Statement of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion to Dismiss, 50 MOTION to Dismiss Second Amended Class Action Complaint

63 Cited authorities

  1. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 266,625 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' "

  2. Conley v. Gibson

    355 U.S. 41 (1957)   Cited 58,505 times   25 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief"

  3. H. J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co.

    492 U.S. 229 (1989)   Cited 3,622 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the continuity prong can be met by showing that related predicate offenses continued over a substantial period of time or posed a threat of continuing activity

  4. Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co.

    473 U.S. 479 (1985)   Cited 4,226 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the fact that a statute can be "applied in situations not expressly anticipated by Congress does not demonstrate ambiguity. It demonstrates breadth."

  5. United States v. Turkette

    452 U.S. 576 (1981)   Cited 2,718 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a RICO enterprise must exist "separate and apart" from the pattern of racketeering activity

  6. Salinas v. United States

    522 U.S. 52 (1997)   Cited 1,207 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the canon of construction requiring a clear statement to alter the federal-state balance of criminal jurisdiction "does not warrant a departure from terms" where the statute's "text . . . is unambiguous on the point under consideration"

  7. Reves v. Ernst Young

    507 U.S. 170 (1993)   Cited 1,412 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the defendant "participates" if he "directs" the pattern of racketeering activity

  8. Rotella v. Wood

    528 U.S. 549 (2000)   Cited 919 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding discovery rule inapplicable to § 2462 limitations period

  9. Schmuck v. United States

    489 U.S. 705 (1989)   Cited 1,161 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "routine" mailings that occurred "after the fraud [had] come to fruition" were part of the execution of the defendant's fraudulent scheme because the fraud was not a "'one-shot' operation," but an "ongoing fraudulent venture"

  10. Cedric Kushner Promotions, Ltd. v. King

    533 U.S. 158 (2001)   Cited 731 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding person who is a corporate owner or employee is distinct from the corporation itself

  11. Section 1962 - Prohibited activities

    18 U.S.C. § 1962   Cited 15,876 times   60 Legal Analyses
    Specifying prohibited activities

  12. Section 1961 - Definitions

    18 U.S.C. § 1961   Cited 14,951 times   72 Legal Analyses
    Defining what the terms “person” and “enterprise” include

  13. Section 1341 - Frauds and swindles

    18 U.S.C. § 1341   Cited 13,403 times   104 Legal Analyses
    Relating to mail fraud

  14. Section 1343 - Fraud by wire, radio, or television

    18 U.S.C. § 1343   Cited 11,948 times   170 Legal Analyses
    Barring fraudulent schemes "for obtaining money or property"

  15. Section 1964 - Civil remedies

    18 U.S.C. § 1964   Cited 6,087 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Granting civil remedies for RICO violation