Mulhall v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
District Court, N.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER RE DEFENDANT WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.’S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
Re: Dkt. No. 38
Donna M. Ryu, United States Magistrate Judge
Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Defendant” or “Wells Fargo”) moves the court to dismiss Plaintiff Robert Mulhall’s (“Plaintiff’) Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Motion to Dismiss (“MTD”) [Docket No. 38]. Having considered the parties submissions as well as oral argument, and for the reasons stated below, Defendant’s motion is granted in part and denied in part.…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Tellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights, Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Lee v. City Of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Moreland Apartments Associates v. LP Equity LLCDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2019
- Unite Here Retirement Fund v. City Of San JoseDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2023