Legal Opinion
Sukumar v. Nautilus, Inc.
District Court, W.D. Virginia
Decided December 19, 2011No. Case No. 7:11-cv-00218PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
JAMES C. TURK, Senior District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Nautilus, Inc. (“Nautilus” or “Defendant”)’s Partial Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 70). Plaintiffs Ponani Sukumar (“Sukumar”) and Southern California Stroke Rehabilitation Associates, Inc. (“SCSRA”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) have filed an Opposition (ECF No. 77), to which Nautilus has replied (ECF No. 84). Oral argument was held on December 6, 2011, and the matter is now ripe for decision. For the reasons set forth below, Nautilus’s Partial Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.
I. FACTUAL AND…
2Cases cited50 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Hines v. DavidowitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Virginia Uranium, Inc. v. McAuliffeDistrict Court, W.D. Virginia · 2015
- Pryor v. Bank of America, N.A. (In re Pryor)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2012