37 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 267,813 times 281 Legal Analyses
Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 280,791 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
Lexmark Int'l, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc.
572 U.S. 118 (2014) Cited 3,054 times 74 Legal Analyses
Holding that the respondent could not "obtain relief" under § 1125 "without evidence of injury proximately caused by [the petitioner's] alleged misrepresentations"
Lee v. City of L.A.
250 F.3d 668 (9th Cir. 2001) Cited 11,064 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that the district court erred in granting a motion to dismiss "by relying on extrinsic evidence and by taking judicial notice of disputed matters of fact to support its ruling"
Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. Seb S. A.
563 U.S. 754 (2011) Cited 841 times 67 Legal Analyses
Holding that a finding of deliberate ignorance requires the defendant to "take deliberate actions to avoid learning of [wrongdoing]."
Astoria Federal S. L. Ass'n. v. Solimino
501 U.S. 104 (1991) Cited 1,271 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding that where a plaintiff must exhaust state administrative proceedings to bring federal claims, the administrative adjudication lacks res judicata effect, as an exception to the default rule of administrative preclusion
Cook, Perkiss Liehe v. N.C. Collection Serv
911 F.2d 242 (9th Cir. 1990) Cited 2,311 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that an advertisement that "impl[ies] lower rates and better services than those of a competitor . . . constitutes puffery and is not actionable as false advertising"
Mack v. S. Bay Beer Distribs., Inc.
798 F.2d 1279 (9th Cir. 1986) Cited 2,399 times
Holding that state agency determination in unemployment hearing did not preclude federal employment discrimination claim because plaintiff did not have adequate opportunity to present discrimination claim before agency
Newcal Industries, Inc. v. IKON Office Solution
513 F.3d 1038 (9th Cir. 2008) Cited 904 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiff who had already filed a fraud suit under the Sherman Act, Lanham Act, and RICO had standing to seek a declaration that the defendant's fraudulently procured contracts were invalid
TrafficSchool.com, Inc. v. Edriver Inc.
653 F.3d 820 (9th Cir. 2011) Cited 740 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that district court committed no error in holding that the defendants violated the Lanham Act but declining to make an award of profits, where the plaintiffs "didn't produce any proof of past injury or causation"
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 362,607 times 962 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Section 17200 - Unfair competition defined
Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 Cited 18,446 times 316 Legal Analyses
Prohibiting unlawful business practices
Section 1125 - False designations of origin, false descriptions, and dilution forbidden
15 U.S.C. § 1125 Cited 15,808 times 328 Legal Analyses
Holding "the person who asserts trade dress protection has the burden of proving that the matter sought to be protected is not functional"
Rule 408 - Compromise Offers and Negotiations
Fed. R. Evid. 408 Cited 4,447 times 50 Legal Analyses
Holding that premature deliberations constituted an internal jury influence subject to the post-verdict restrictions of Rule 606(b)

R. Thomas Cannarella v. Volvo Car USA Llc et al

37 Cited authorities

Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint

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

Holding that the respondent could not "obtain relief" under § 1125 "without evidence of injury proximately caused by [the petitioner's] alleged misrepresentations"

Holding that the district court erred in granting a motion to dismiss "by relying on extrinsic evidence and by taking judicial notice of disputed matters of fact to support its ruling"

Holding that a finding of deliberate ignorance requires the defendant to "take deliberate actions to avoid learning of [wrongdoing]."

Holding that where a plaintiff must exhaust state administrative proceedings to bring federal claims, the administrative adjudication lacks res judicata effect, as an exception to the default rule of administrative preclusion

Holding that an advertisement that "impl[ies] lower rates and better services than those of a competitor . . . constitutes puffery and is not actionable as false advertising"

Holding that state agency determination in unemployment hearing did not preclude federal employment discrimination claim because plaintiff did not have adequate opportunity to present discrimination claim before agency

Holding that plaintiff who had already filed a fraud suit under the Sherman Act, Lanham Act, and RICO had standing to seek a declaration that the defendant's fraudulently procured contracts were invalid

Holding that district court committed no error in holding that the defendants violated the Lanham Act but declining to make an award of profits, where the plaintiffs "didn't produce any proof of past injury or causation"

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

Prohibiting unlawful business practices

Holding "the person who asserts trade dress protection has the burden of proving that the matter sought to be protected is not functional"

Holding that premature deliberations constituted an internal jury influence subject to the post-verdict restrictions of Rule 606(b)