Legal Opinion

Reichman v. Poshmark, Inc.

District Court, S.D. California

Decided January 3, 2017No. Case No. 16-cv-2359 DMS (JLB)PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT

Honorable Dana M. Sabraw, United States District Judge

Pending before the Court is Defendant Poshmark, Inc.’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff Christopher J. Reichman’s Complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) and (6) of the Federal Rules, of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff filed an opposition to the motion, and Defendant filéd a reply. For the following reasons, the Court grants in part and denies in part the motion,

I

BACKGROUND

Defendant operates a mobile application (“app”) that provides users with a platform to sell and…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  4. Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  5. Spokeo, Inc. v. RobinsSupreme Court of the United States · 2016

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Doe v. Regents of the University of CaliforniaDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2023
  2. Tuck v. Yelp, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 2025
  3. Wilson v. Rater8, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API