Legal Opinion
Converse v. Vizio, Inc.
District Court, W.D. Washington
Decided June 3, 2020No. 3:17-cv-05897Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 7 AMY CONVERSE, on her own behalf CASE NO. C17-5897 BHS 8 and on behalf of others similarly situated, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 9 MOTION FOR Plaintiff, RECONSIDERATION 10 v. 11 VIZIO, INC. a California corporation, 12 Defendant. 13 This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Amy Converse’s (“Converse”) 14 motion for reconsideration. Dkt. 117. The Court has considered the pleadings filed in 15 support of the motion and the remainder of the file and hereby denies the motion for the 16 reasons stated herein. 17…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. DukesSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Comcast Corp. v. BehrendSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
- 389 Orange Street Partners v. ArnoldCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- Jesus Leyva v. Medlin Industries IncCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Young v. YoungWashington Supreme Court · 2008
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.