139 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 252,626 times   279 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
  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 266,542 times   365 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' "
  3. Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins

    578 U.S. 330 (2016)   Cited 7,401 times   437 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a statutory violation, without more, did not give rise to Article III standing
  4. Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife

    504 U.S. 555 (1992)   Cited 27,829 times   138 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"
  5. Gonzaga University v. Doe

    536 U.S. 273 (2002)   Cited 3,215 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that nothing "short of an unambiguously conferred right ... support a cause of action brought under § 1983"
  6. Valley Forge College v. Americans United

    454 U.S. 464 (1982)   Cited 4,970 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the psychological consequence presumably produced by observation of conduct with which one disagrees ... is not an injury sufficient to confer standing under Art. III, even though the disagreement is phrased in constitutional terms"
  7. Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USA

    317 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 4,198 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
  8. In re Gilead Sciences

    536 F.3d 1049 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 2,901 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a court need not accept as true "allegations that are merely conclusory"
  9. Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores

    421 U.S. 723 (1975)   Cited 2,070 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Holding that only purchasers and sellers of a security have a private right of action under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b–5
  10. Kearns v. Ford Motor Co.

    567 F.3d 1120 (9th Cir. 2009)   Cited 2,254 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that circumstances constituting fraud must be stated with particularity
  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 345,805 times   922 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 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 38,918 times   316 Legal Analyses
    Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"
  13. Rule 201 - Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts

    Fed. R. Evid. 201   Cited 28,274 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Holding "[n]ormally, in deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, courts must limit their inquiry to the facts stated in the complaint and the documents either attached to or incorporated in the complaint. However, courts may also consider matters of which they may take judicial notice."
  14. Section 2510 - Definitions

    18 U.S.C. § 2510   Cited 4,250 times   77 Legal Analyses
    Defining "[i]nvestigative or law enforcement officer" as an officer "empowered by law to conduct investigations of or to make arrests for [certain] offenses . . . and any attorney authorized by law to prosecute or participate in the prosecution of such offenses"
  15. Section 2511 - Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited

    18 U.S.C. § 2511   Cited 2,781 times   42 Legal Analyses
    Imposing a penalty on persons who “intentionally intercept ... any wire, oral, or electronic communication”
  16. Section 17500 - Untrue or misleading advertising

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17500   Cited 2,658 times   64 Legal Analyses
    Requiring action that originated in California to effect consumers in another state
  17. Section 17535 - Injunctive relief

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17535   Cited 371 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Granting the city attorney authority to sue under the FAL in terms largely identical to those used in the UCL
  18. Section 631 - Unlawful tapping

    Cal. Pen. Code § 631   Cited 217 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting "any person who . . . makes any unauthorized connection . . . or who willfully and without the consent of all parties to the communication . . . reads, or attempts to read, or to learn the contents or meaning of any message is in transit or passing over any wire, line, or cable . . . "
  19. Section 2710 - Wrongful disclosure of video tape rental or sale records

    18 U.S.C. § 2710   Cited 207 times   72 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting disclosure of "personally identifiable information concerning" consumer of video rental establishment without consent
  20. Section 1799.3 - Disclosure of personal information by providers of video recording sales or rental services

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1799.3   Cited 8 times

    (a) No person providing video recording sales or rental services shall disclose any personal information or the contents of any record, including sales or rental information, which is prepared or maintained by that person, to any person, other than the individual who is the subject of the record, without the written consent of that individual. (b) This section does not apply to any of the following: (1) To a disclosure to any person pursuant to a subpoena or court order. (2) To a disclosure that