§Why CasetextPricing

Jason Saidian v. Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, Inc.

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case or Stay, and Motion to Strike

79 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 251,360 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 265,336 times   364 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. Buckman Co. v. Plaintiffs' Legal Committee

    531 U.S. 341 (2001)   Cited 1,180 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

  4. Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USA

    317 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 4,190 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

  5. Kearns v. Ford Motor Co.

    567 F.3d 1120 (9th Cir. 2009)   Cited 2,245 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that circumstances constituting fraud must be stated with particularity

  6. Cahill v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.

    80 F.3d 336 (9th Cir. 1996)   Cited 3,292 times
    Holding that allegations of material fact are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to plaintiff

  7. Landis v. North American Co.

    299 U.S. 248 (1936)   Cited 8,241 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a decision to stay proceedings "calls for the exercise of judgment, which must weigh competing interests and maintain an even balance"

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

    573 U.S. 102 (2014)   Cited 325 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

  9. Lockyer v. Mirant Corp.

    398 F.3d 1098 (9th Cir. 2005)   Cited 1,507 times
    Holding a stay, although "theoretically" subject to modification, was a reviewable collateral order because "the district court did not impose a time limit on the stay or note circumstances that might result in its modification"

  10. Mazza v. American Honda Motor Co.

    666 F.3d 581 (9th Cir. 2012)   Cited 966 times   51 Legal Analyses
    Holding that false advertising "class must be defined in such a way as to include only members who were exposed to advertising that is alleged to be materially misleading"

  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 344,399 times   920 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 155,442 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. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 38,818 times   316 Legal Analyses
    Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"

  14. Section 1750 - Title of act

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1750   Cited 2,661 times   67 Legal Analyses

    This title may be cited as the Consumers Legal Remedies Act. Ca. Civ. Code § 1750 Added by Stats. 1970, Ch. 1550.

  15. Section 337 - Proceedings in name of United States; provision as to subpoenas

    21 U.S.C. § 337   Cited 666 times   19 Legal Analyses
    Restricting FDCA enforcement to suits by the United States

  16. Section 343 - Misbranded food

    21 U.S.C. § 343   Cited 566 times   59 Legal Analyses
    Setting labeling requirements for food products

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

    Cal. Com. Code § 2313   Cited 364 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Stating that an express warranty is a "promise made by the seller to the buyer which relates to the goods"

  18. Section 2314 - Implied warranty: merchantability; usage of trade

    Cal. Com. Code § 2314   Cited 319 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Adopting and codifying Uniform Commercial Code § 2-314

  19. Section 101.11 - Nutrition labeling of standard menu items in covered establishments

    21 C.F.R. § 101.11   Cited 4 times   17 Legal Analyses

    (a)Definitions. The definitions of terms in section 201 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act apply to such terms when used in this section. In addition, for purposes of this section: Authorized official of a restaurant or similar retail food establishment means the owner, operator, agent in charge, or other person authorized by the owner, operator, or agent in charge to register the restaurant or similar retail food establishment, which is not otherwise subject to section 403(q)(5)(H) of the