9 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 252,784 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
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 266,697 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' "
Foman v. Davis
371 U.S. 178 (1962) Cited 28,629 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that an appeal was improperly dismissed when the record as a whole — including a timely but incomplete notice of appeal and a premature but complete notice — revealed the orders petitioner sought to appeal
McZeal v. Sprint Nextel Corp.
501 F.3d 1354 (Fed. Cir. 2007) Cited 410 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that a direct infringement claim made in accordance with Form 16 (now Form 18) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure meets the Twombly pleading standard
Phonometrics, Inc. v. Hospitality Franchise Systems, Inc.
203 F.3d 790 (Fed. Cir. 2000) Cited 143 times
Holding that the complaint placed the defendant on notice when it alleged ownership of the asserted patent, named the individual defendants, cited the patents that are allegedly infringed, described the means by which the defendants allegedly infringed the patents, and pointed to specific sections of the patent law invoked
Judin v. U.S.
110 F.3d 780 (Fed. Cir. 1997) Cited 62 times
Holding that the trial court abused its discretion in denying a sanctions motion when the record showed that neither the plaintiff nor his counsel had “obtain[ed], or attempted to obtain, a sample of the accused device ... so that its actual design and functioning could be compared with the claims of the patent”
Banks v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n
977 F.2d 1081 (7th Cir. 1992) Cited 60 times 1 Legal Analyses
Finding that "[u]nder the Supreme Court's ruling in [ Board of Regents], allegations that the NCAA rules restrain trade or commerce may not be viewed as per se violations of the Sherman Act"
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 345,982 times 922 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Section 101 - Inventions patentable
35 U.S.C. § 101 Cited 3,400 times 2189 Legal Analyses
Defining patentable subject matter as "any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof."

Phoenix Licensing, L.L.C. et al v. Allstate Corporation et al

9 Cited authorities

Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

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' "

Holding that an appeal was improperly dismissed when the record as a whole — including a timely but incomplete notice of appeal and a premature but complete notice — revealed the orders petitioner sought to appeal

Holding that a direct infringement claim made in accordance with Form 16 (now Form 18) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure meets the Twombly pleading standard

Finding that "[u]nder the Supreme Court's ruling in [ Board of Regents], allegations that the NCAA rules restrain trade or commerce may not be viewed as per se violations of the Sherman Act"

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Defining patentable subject matter as "any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof."