In re HIV Antitrust Litigation
District Court, N.D. California
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 STALEY, et al., Case No. 19-cv-02573-EMC 8 Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND 9 v. DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS 10 GILEAD SCIENCES, INC., et al., Docket Nos. 836, 838 11 Defendants. 12 13 14 Currently pending before the Court are two motions to dismiss – one filed by Teva and the 15 other by Gilead. Both Teva and Gilead challenge the complaint filed by United HealthCare 16 Services, Inc. (“UHS”) in Case No. C-21-9202 EMC. The motions overlap in content. Having 17 considered the parties’ briefs as…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Manzarek v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Cheramie Services, Inc. v. Shell Deepwater Production, Inc.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 2010
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.