Legal Opinion
Youngevity International, Corp. v. Smith
District Court, S.D. California
Decided December 1, 2016No. Case No.: 3:16-cv-00704-L-JLBPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION [Doc. 48] AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS [Doc. 50]
Hon. M. James Lorenz, United States District Judge
Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for a preliminary injunction and *1026Defendants’ Motion to dismiss. The Court decides the matter on the papers submitted and without oral argument. See Civ. L. R. 7.1 (d)(1). For the reasons stated below, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ Motion for a preliminary injunction and GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Defendants’ Motion to dismiss.
I. Background
Thi…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2008
- Hal Roach Studios, Inc., a Delaware Corporation v. Richard Feiner and Company, Inc., a New York CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Alliance for Wild Rockies v. CottrellCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- NORTH STAR INTERNATIONAL, a Nevada Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. the ARIZONA CORPORATION COMMISSION, Et Al., Defendants-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Charles R. Williams v. Santa Rosa Medical Hospital, et al.District Court, N.D. California · 2026
- Outlaw Laboratory, LP v. DG in PB, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2020
- Truinject Corp. v. Galderma S.A.District Court, D. Delaware · 2020