Legal Opinion
Kazenercom Too v. Ibar Development, LLC
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided December 27, 2011No. 09-56329, 10-55458, 10-55922UnpublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM ***
We address three related appeals arising from an asset purchase transaction between Kazenercom TOO (“Kazenereom”) and its affiliates on one hand, and Turan Petroleum, Inc. (“Turan”) and its affiliates on the other.
I
Kazenercom and its affiliates appeal the district court’s dismissal with prejudice of their Verified Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) and Verified Amended Third-Party Complaint (“ATPC”) pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 12(e). We review the Rule 12(e) dismissals for abuse of discretion, and review de novo the Rule 12(b)(6) dismissals. We vacate…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Michael Henry Ferdik v. Joe Bonzelet, SheriffCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
- In Re Gilead Sciences Securities LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- United States Ex Rel. Robinson Rancheria Citizens Council v. Borneo, Inc. Clear Lake Indian Bingo Ltd. American Arbitration Association Herman SchnerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Zucco Partners, LLC v. Digimarc Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Chennareddy v. DodaroCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2017