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
Holding that to state a claim, a plaintiff must plead sufficient factual content that "allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged"
Holding that pleading "the process for" using the accused product in an infringing way "has no other substantial non-infringing use" is not the same as pleading the accused product contains a component that can only infringe, and therefore fails to state a claim for contributory infringement
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
Holding that complaint survives Rule 12(b) challenge when it gives notice of what patentee accuses of being an infringing act with reasonable inferences that such acts are being done
Holding that "a telephone call to an identified suspect from a detective investigating a charge of vandalism [and requesting the suspect come to the station to answer charges] [does not] constitute[] such a restrain on the suspect's freedom that his coming to the station house is anything other than voluntary action"
Rejecting a claim under Section 1985 plaintiff failed to offer any "factual allegation to plausibly suggest [that defendants had] discriminatory state of mind."