§Why CasetextPricing

Spirit Clothing Company v. Jerry Leigh of California, Inc.

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Counterclaim

18 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. Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty.

    693 F.3d 896 (9th Cir. 2012)   Cited 7,986 times
    Holding that "claims [that are] voluntarily dismissed" are "waived if not repled" in an amended complaint"

  4. Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors

    266 F.3d 979 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 5,226 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that unwarranted inferences are insufficient to defeat a motion to dismiss

  5. 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

  6. Schreiber Distributing v. Serv-Well Furniture

    806 F.2d 1393 (9th Cir. 1986)   Cited 2,376 times
    Holding that Rule 9(b) requires the plaintiff to "state with particularity" the "circumstances constituting the fraud," including a statement of "the time, place, and specific content of the false representations as well as the identities of the parties to the misrepresentation."

  7. Gadda v. State Bar

    511 F.3d 933 (9th Cir. 2007)   Cited 115 times
    Holding dismissal without leave to amend is proper where amendment would be futile

  8. Quiksilver, Inc. v. Kymsta Corp.

    466 F.3d 749 (9th Cir. 2006)   Cited 99 times
    Holding remoteness is not an element of a § 1115(b) defense simply because the text of the statute does not contain a remoteness element

  9. Hokto Kinoko Co. v. Concord Farms, Inc.

    738 F.3d 1085 (9th Cir. 2013)   Cited 62 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Concluding that a counterclaim defendant seeking cancellation of plaintiff's mark did not satisfy the scienter standard because the defendant “put forth no evidence suggesting that the false statement [in the plaintiff's application] was anything other than the result of a simple mistake,” and “adduced no evidence that [the plaintiff] knew of the misstatement ... or intended to defraud the [PTO]”

  10. AirWair Int'l Ltd. v. Schultz

    84 F. Supp. 3d 943 (N.D. Cal. 2015)   Cited 38 times
    Holding that superior rights are clearly established by, inter alia, a court decree, settlement, or registration

  11. 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 357,835 times   950 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. 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. . . ."

  13. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 39,880 times   331 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

  14. Section 1119 - Power of court over registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1119   Cited 832 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court the power in an action involving a registered mark to order the cancellation of a registration

  15. Section 1120 - Civil liability for false or fraudulent registration

    15 U.S.C. § 1120   Cited 286 times   2 Legal Analyses

    Any person who shall procure registration in the Patent and Trademark Office of a mark by a false or fraudulent declaration or representation, oral or in writing, or by any false means, shall be liable in a civil action by any person injured thereby for any damages sustained in consequence thereof. 15 U.S.C. § 1120 July 5, 1946, ch. 540, title VI, §38, 60 Stat. 440; Pub. L. 93-596, §1, Jan. 2, 1975, 88 Stat. 1949. EDITORIAL NOTES PRIOR PROVISIONSAct Feb. 20, 1905, ch. 592, §25, 33 Stat. 730. AMENDMENTS1975-

  16. Section 1095 - Registration on principal register not precluded

    15 U.S.C. § 1095   Cited 8 times   2 Legal Analyses

    Registration of a mark on the supplemental register, or under the Act of March 19, 1920, shall not preclude registration by the registrant on the principal register established by this chapter. Registration of a mark on the supplemental register shall not constitute an admission that the mark has not acquired distinctiveness. 15 U.S.C. § 1095 July 5, 1946, ch. 540, title II, §27, 60 Stat. 436; Pub. L. 100-667, title I, §124, Nov. 16, 1988, 102 Stat. 3943. EDITORIAL NOTES REFERENCES IN TEXTAct of