Animal Legal Defense Fund v. HVFG LLC
District Court, N.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
WILLIAM ALSUP, District Judge.
INTRODUCTION
In this false-advertising action, plaintiffs assert that defendants’ advertisements misrepresent the nature of defendants’ páté. For the following reasons, defendants’ motion to dismiss is Granted in part and Denied in part.
STATEMENT
Plaintiffs Animal Legal Defense Fund, a California nonprofit'corporation, and Regal Vegan, a New York corporation, allege that defendants Hudson Valley Foie Gras, LLC, a New York corporation, and four of its officers (collectively “Hudson Valley”)…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection AgencySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- TrafficSchool.com, Inc. v. Edriver Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- Warren v. Fox Family Worldwide, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- McCoy v. Nestle USA, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2016
- Dana v. Hershey Co.District Court, N.D. California · 2016
- 7EDU Impact Academy Inc. v. YouDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2024
- Silver v. BA Sports Nutrition, LLCDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2020