Legal Opinion

Loftus v. Primero Mining Corp.

District Court, C.D. California

Decided January 30, 2017No. CV 16-01034-BRO (RAOx)PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER RE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS [74]

BEVERLY REID O’CONNELL, United States District Judge

I. INTRODUCTION

Pending before the Court is Defendants Primero Mining Corp. (“Primero”), Joseph Conway, Ernest Mast, David Blaiklock, and Wendy Kaufman1 (collectively, “Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss. (See Dkt. No. 74 (hereinafter, “Mot.”).) After considering the papers filed in support of and in opposition the instant Motion, the- Court finds this matter appropriate for resolution without oral argument of counsel. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; C.D. Cal. L.R. 7-15. For the reasons set forth below,…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Tellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights, Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Ernst & Ernst v. HochfelderSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. In Re Gilead Sciences Securities LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
  5. Evel Knievel Krystal Knievel v. Espn, a Subsidiary of Walt Disney, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Costabile v. Natus Med. Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2018
  2. Linenweber v. Southwest Airlines CoDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API