§Why CasetextPricing

Total Recall Technologies v. Palmer Luckey, et al

MOTION to Dismiss

61 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. Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife

    504 U.S. 555 (1992)   Cited 28,896 times   142 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"

  4. Steel Co. v. Citizens for Better Env't

    523 U.S. 83 (1998)   Cited 11,135 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding this court may raise the issue of "statutory jurisdiction" sua sponte

  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. Swartz v. KPMG LLP

    476 F.3d 756 (9th Cir. 2007)   Cited 2,933 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “[t]o the extent Swartz seeks a declaration of defendants' liability for damages sought for his other causes of action,” claim must be dismissed as “merely duplicative”

  7. Daniels-Hall v. National Educ. Ass'n

    629 F.3d 992 (9th Cir. 2010)   Cited 2,173 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding information made publicly available on official government websites appropriate for judicial notice

  8. White v. Lee

    227 F.3d 1214 (9th Cir. 2000)   Cited 2,151 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, because it “is based on and implements the First Amendment right to petition,” the Noerr–Pennington doctrine “applies equally in all contexts”

  9. Savage v. Glendale Union High School

    343 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 1,464 times
    Finding that Arizona school district with a substantial degree of autonomy did not perform a central government function, even though Arizona's Constitution mandated that its legislature “provide for the establishment and maintenance of a ... public school system” (quoting Ariz. Const. art. XI, § I.A)

  10. Warren v. Fox Family Worldwide, Inc.

    328 F.3d 1136 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 1,166 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding the court is "not required to accept as true conclusory allegations which are contradicted by documents referred to in the complaint."

  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 3426.1 - Definitions

    Cal. Civ. Code § 3426.1   Cited 882 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Defining trade secrets under CUTSA similarly

  15. Section 1559 - Enforcement of contract made for benefit of third party

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1559   Cited 605 times
    Allowing enforcement a contract “made expressly for the benefit of a third person”

  16. Section 3426.3 - Damages for actual loss or unjust enrichment

    Cal. Civ. Code § 3426.3   Cited 139 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Permitting a complainant to recover for unjust enrichment caused by misappropriation

  17. Section 3426.7 - Other statutes not superseded; remedies not affected; disclosure of record

    Cal. Civ. Code § 3426.7   Cited 83 times

    (a) Except as otherwise expressly provided, this title does not supersede any statute relating to misappropriation of a trade secret, or any statute otherwise regulating trade secrets. (b) This title does not affect (1) contractual remedies, whether or not based upon misappropriation of a trade secret, (2) other civil remedies that are not based upon misappropriation of a trade secret, or (3) criminal remedies, whether or not based upon misappropriation of a trade secret. (c) This title does not

  18. Section 457 - Performance of conditions precedent in contract

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 457   Cited 59 times

    In pleading the performance of conditions precedent in a contract, it is not necessary to state the facts showing such performance, but it may be stated generally that the party duly performed all the conditions on his part, and if such allegation be controverted, the party pleading must establish, on the trial, the facts showing such performance. Ca. Civ. Proc. Code § 457 Enacted 1872.