Legal Opinion

Means v. Lyft, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California

Decided June 13, 2024No. 3:24-cv-00177Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 TABATHA MEANS, Case No. 24-cv-00177-MMC 8 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND 9 v. DENYING IN PART LYFT'S MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED 10 LYFT, INC., COMPLAINT 11 Defendant. Re: Dkt. No. 28 12 13 Before the Court is defendant Lyft, Inc.’s (“Lyft”) “Motion to Dismiss First Amended 14 Complaint,” filed April 5, 2024, pursuant to Rules 12(b)(6) and 9(b) of the Federal Rules 15 of Civil Procedure. On May 10, 2024, plaintiff Tabitha Means (“Means”) filed opposition, 16 to which Lyft, on May 24, 2024,…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
  4. Jena Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department Al Olsen, Police Chief, Individually and as a Police AgentCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
  5. Carvalho v. Equifax Information Services, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API