Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

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' "

Gen. Tel. Co. of Sw. v. Falcon

Holding that named plaintiff must prove “much more than the validity of his own claim”; the individual plaintiff must show that “the individual's claim and the class claims will share common questions of law or fact and that the individual's claim will be typical of the class claims,” explicitly referencing the “commonality” and “typicality” requirements of Rule 23

Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp.

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"

Bates v. Dow Agrosciences LLC

Holding that a preemption clause barring state laws "in addition to or different" from a federal Act does not interfere with an "equivalent" state provision

Kwikset Corp. v. Superior Court

Holding "the standards for establishing standing under section 17204 and eligibility for restitution under section 17203 are wholly distinct"

In re Tobacco II Cases

Holding class representatives had standing to challenge common marketing of cigarettes despite differences in the advertisements or statements on which class members relied

Mazza v. American Honda Motor Co.

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"

Williams v. Gerber Products

Holding that "reasonable consumers expect that the ingredient list ... confirms other representations on the packaging"

Al-Kidd v. Ashcroft

Holding that Iqbal does not impose a probability requirement

Steckman v. Hart Brewing, Inc.

Holding that the court is “not required to accept as true conclusory allegations which are contradicted by documents referred to in the complaint”

Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

Rule 23 - Class Actions

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"

Section 17500 - Untrue or misleading advertising

Requiring action that originated in California to effect consumers in another state

Section 355 - New drugs

Granting the court discretion to change the date on which an ANDA may be approved if "either party to the action failed to reasonably cooperate in expediting the action"

Section 321 - Definitions; generally

Defining “new drug”

Section 352 - Misbranded drugs and devices

Setting labeling requirements for drug products

Section 501.204 - Unlawful acts and practices

Prohibiting "[u]nfair methods of competition, unconscionable acts or practices, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce"

Section 1770 - [Operative 7/1/2024]

Prohibiting "unfair or deceptive acts or practices"

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

Stating that an express warranty is a "promise made by the seller to the buyer which relates to the goods"

Section 2314 - Implied warranty: merchantability; usage of trade

Adopting and codifying Uniform Commercial Code § 2-314

Section 201.57 - Specific requirements on content and format of labeling for human prescription drug and biological products described in Section 201.56(b)(1)

Listing requirements for different subsections for indications, dosage, and clinical studies

Section 201.56 - Requirements on content and format of labeling for human prescription drug and biological products

Disallowing claims or suggestions of drug use on labeling if there is a lack of substantial evidence

Section 330.10 - Procedures for classifying OTC drugs as generally recognized as safe and effective and not misbranded, and for establishing monographs

Subjecting "[a]ny product which fails to conform to an applicable monograph" to regulatory action

Section 201.61 - Statement of identity