45 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 255,123 times 280 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 268,865 times 367 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' "
Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc.
572 U.S. 898 (2014) Cited 1,354 times 92 Legal Analyses
Holding that claims are not indefinite if, "viewed in light of the specification and prosecution history, [they] inform those skilled in the art about the scope of the invention with reasonable certainty"
Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc.
510 U.S. 517 (1994) Cited 2,837 times 30 Legal Analyses
Holding that under the Copyright Act fee-shifting statute, 17 U.S.C. § 505, defendants and plaintiffs are to be treated the same, contrary to the Court's interpretation of § 1988
KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.
550 U.S. 398 (2007) Cited 1,523 times 180 Legal Analyses
Holding that, in an obviousness analysis, "[r]igid preventative rules that deny factfinders recourse to common sense, however, are neither necessary under our case law nor consistent with it"
Starr v. Baca
652 F.3d 1202 (9th Cir. 2011) Cited 5,305 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that a series of investigative reports documenting systemic deficiencies in a jail put the defendant-supervisor on notice of the risk of the harm that befell the plaintiff
Simmons v. Navajo County
609 F.3d 1011 (9th Cir. 2010) Cited 3,786 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that deliberate indifference requires the plaintiff to show the official was subjectively aware of the serious medical need and failed to adequately respond
Graham v. John Deere Co.
383 U.S. 1 (1966) Cited 3,157 times 63 Legal Analyses
Holding commercial success is a "secondary consideration" suggesting nonobviousness
Daniels-Hall v. National Educ. Ass'n
629 F.3d 992 (9th Cir. 2010) Cited 2,105 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding courts may take judicial notice of information made publicly available by government entities on government websites
Shroyer v. New Cingular Wireless Services
622 F.3d 1035 (9th Cir. 2010) Cited 1,376 times
Holding that fraud claims were pled with particularity when the allegations concerned a "relatively definite time frame" identifiable by discrete events, even though exact dates were not provided
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 348,416 times 930 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 157,557 times 196 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
Section 1331 - Federal question
28 U.S.C. § 1331 Cited 97,986 times 136 Legal Analyses
Finding that in order to invoke federal question jurisdiction, a plaintiff's claims must arise "under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."
Section 1391 - Venue generally
28 U.S.C. § 1391 Cited 28,039 times 197 Legal Analyses
Finding that venue lies where a "substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim" occurred
Section 2201 - Creation of remedy
28 U.S.C. § 2201 Cited 24,638 times 61 Legal Analyses
Granting district courts the authority to create a remedy with the force of a final judgment
Section 112 - Specification
35 U.S.C. § 112 Cited 7,288 times 1031 Legal Analyses
Requiring patent applications to include a "specification" that provides, among other information, a written description of the invention and of the manner and process of making and using it
Section 271 - Infringement of patent
35 U.S.C. § 271 Cited 6,066 times 1055 Legal Analyses
Holding that testing is a "use"
Section 103 - Conditions for patentability; non-obvious subject matter
35 U.S.C. § 103 Cited 6,065 times 462 Legal Analyses
Holding the party seeking invalidity must prove "the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains."
Section 102 - Conditions for patentability; novelty
35 U.S.C. § 102 Cited 5,945 times 961 Legal Analyses
Prohibiting the grant of a patent to one who "did not himself invent the subject matter sought to be patented"
Section 1338 - Patents, plant variety protection, copyrights, mask works, designs, trademarks, and unfair competition
28 U.S.C. § 1338 Cited 5,416 times 71 Legal Analyses
Granting exclusive jurisdiction to the district courts "of any civil action arising under any Act of Congress relating to patents, . . . copyrights and trademarks"

Roland Corporation v. Inmusicbrands, Inc.

45 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 claims are not indefinite if, "viewed in light of the specification and prosecution history, [they] inform those skilled in the art about the scope of the invention with reasonable certainty"

Holding that under the Copyright Act fee-shifting statute, 17 U.S.C. § 505, defendants and plaintiffs are to be treated the same, contrary to the Court's interpretation of § 1988

Holding that, in an obviousness analysis, "[r]igid preventative rules that deny factfinders recourse to common sense, however, are neither necessary under our case law nor consistent with it"

Holding that a series of investigative reports documenting systemic deficiencies in a jail put the defendant-supervisor on notice of the risk of the harm that befell the plaintiff

Holding that deliberate indifference requires the plaintiff to show the official was subjectively aware of the serious medical need and failed to adequately respond

Holding commercial success is a "secondary consideration" suggesting nonobviousness

Holding courts may take judicial notice of information made publicly available by government entities on government websites

Holding that fraud claims were pled with particularity when the allegations concerned a "relatively definite time frame" identifiable by discrete events, even though exact dates were not provided

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

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

Finding that in order to invoke federal question jurisdiction, a plaintiff's claims must arise "under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."

Finding that venue lies where a "substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim" occurred

Granting district courts the authority to create a remedy with the force of a final judgment

Requiring patent applications to include a "specification" that provides, among other information, a written description of the invention and of the manner and process of making and using it

Holding that testing is a "use"

Prohibiting the grant of a patent to one who "did not himself invent the subject matter sought to be patented"

Granting exclusive jurisdiction to the district courts "of any civil action arising under any Act of Congress relating to patents, . . . copyrights and trademarks"