Legal Opinion
Magpayo v. Walmart Inc.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided October 18, 2024No. 3:24-cv-01350Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 PEARL MAGPAYO, Case No. 24-cv-01350-WHO 8 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 9 v. DISMISS 10 WALMART INC., Re: Dkt. No. 30 Defendant. 11 12 Plaintiff Pearl Magpayo filed this putative class action seeking to challenge the advertising 13 and label disclosures on defendant’s Spring Valley Fish Oil Omega-3 dietary supplements 14 (“Products”). First Amended Complaint (“FAC,” Dkt. No. 25) ¶¶ 35-36. Magpayo claims that the 15 packaging on defendant Walmart’s fish oil supplements convey to reasonable consumers that 16…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Lopez v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- In Re Gilead Sciences Securities LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Rhoades v. Avon Products, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.