Legal Opinion

Gartin v. S & M NuTec LLC

District Court, C.D. California

Decided April 4, 2007No. CV 06-2747-SVW (PLAx)PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION [38]

WILSON, District Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

This lawsuit is about dog treats. Plaintiff Sandy Gartin (“Gartin” or “Plaintiff’) seeks to bring a class action on behalf of all consumers who have purchased “Greenies dog treats” (“Greenies”) based on Defendant S & M NuTec LLC’s (“NuTec” or “Defendant”) alleged failure to disclose certain dangers associated with Greenies. Plaintiff filed a motion for class certification pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) on November 3, 2006. Because Plaintiff has failed to satisfy the…

2Cases cited53 opinions

  1. Amchem Products, Inc. v. WindsorSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  2. General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. FalconSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  3. Eisen v. Carlisle & JacquelinSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  4. Affiliated Ute Citizens of Utah v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  5. Phillips Petroleum Co. v. ShuttsSupreme Court of the United States · 1985

48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. In re Conagra Foods, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2014
  2. Keegan v. American Honda Motor Co.District Court, C.D. California · 2012
  3. Hadley v. Kellogg Sales Co.District Court, N.D. California · 2018
  4. Wiener v. Dannon Co.District Court, C.D. California · 2009
  5. Cholakyan v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLCDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2012

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API