§Why CasetextPricing

Pilates Technologies, LLC v. Guthy-Renker Corporation et al

REPLY in Support of MOTION to Dismiss Case 7

42 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 263,477 times   281 Legal Analyses
    Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint

  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 276,716 times   369 Legal Analyses
    Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing

  3. Lopez v. Smith

    203 F.3d 1122 (9th Cir. 2000)   Cited 24,628 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a pro se litigant must be given leave to amend his complaint if it appears at all possible that the plaintiff can correct the deficiencies in the complaint

  4. Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USA

    317 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 4,322 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 2,334 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that circumstances constituting fraud must be stated with particularity

  6. Fox v. Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc.

    35 Cal.4th 797 (Cal. 2005)   Cited 1,272 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[r]esolution of the statute of limitations issue is normally a question of fact."

  7. Moore v. Kayport Package Exp., Inc.

    885 F.2d 531 (9th Cir. 1989)   Cited 1,877 times
    Holding that a complaint did not satisfy Rule 9(b) because it "d[id] not specify which plaintiff received which prospectus, or which plaintiff made purchases through the stockbroker defendants"

  8. Rosal v. First Federal Bank of California

    671 F. Supp. 2d 1111 (N.D. Cal. 2009)   Cited 199 times
    Holding that foreclosing on a property pursuant to a deed of trust is not "debt collection" for purposes of the RFDCPA

  9. JRS Products, Inc. v. Matsushita Electric Corp. of America

    115 Cal.App.4th 168 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 210 times
    Holding that a "breach of contract claim cannot be transmuted into tort liability by claiming that the breach interfered with the promisee's business"

  10. Mangini v. Aerojet-General Corp.

    230 Cal.App.3d 1125 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991)   Cited 255 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding claims for products liability, negligence, permanent nuisance and permanent trespass untimely, but allowing claim for continuing nuisance and continuing trespass

  11. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 162,084 times   197 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

  12. Section 338 - Liability created by statute; trespass or injury to real property; taking, detaining or injuring goods or chattels; fraud or mistake; bond of public official; notary's bond; slander of title; section 17536, Business and Professions Code; Water Quality Control Act; Section 19, Article 1, California Constitution; division 26, Health and Safety Code; sections 1603.1, 1615, 5650.1, Fish and Game Code; validity of special tax levy; section 51.7, Civil code; violation of FPA or Forestry and Fire Protection rules and regulations; section 26038, Business and Professions code

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 338   Cited 1,531 times
    Providing for a three-year limitations period for “[a]n action for trespass upon or injury to real property”

  13. Section 256 - Correction of named inventor

    35 U.S.C. § 256   Cited 674 times   66 Legal Analyses
    Permitting correction of inventorship "[w]henever . . . through error an inventor is not named in an issued patent and such error arose without any deceptive intention on his part"

  14. Section 3426 - Title of act

    Cal. Civ. Code § 3426   Cited 572 times   6 Legal Analyses

    This title may be cited as the Uniform Trade Secrets Act. Ca. Civ. Code § 3426 Added by Stats. 1984, Ch. 1724, Sec. 1.

  15. Section 116 - Inventors

    35 U.S.C. § 116   Cited 344 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Providing that, outside the IPR context, "the Director may permit the application to be amended" to fix inventorship errors

  16. Section 278 - Continuation of corporation after dissolution for purposes of suit and winding up affairs

    Del. Code tit. 8 § 278   Cited 175 times   7 Legal Analyses

    All corporations, whether they expire by their own limitation or are otherwise dissolved, shall nevertheless be continued, for the term of 3 years from such expiration or dissolution or for such longer period as the Court of Chancery shall in its discretion direct, bodies corporate for the purpose of prosecuting and defending suits, whether civil, criminal or administrative, by or against them, and of enabling them gradually to settle and close their business, to dispose of and convey their property