Polanco v. Omnicell, Inc.
District Court, D. New Jersey
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HILLMAN, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court by way of several motions [Doc. Nos. 28, 29, 30, 31] seeking to dismiss Plaintiffs First Amended Class Action Complaint (the “Amended Complaint”) [Doc. No. 12] pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted made by Defendants Omnieell, Inc., Sentara Healthcare, South Jersey Health System, Inc., Inspira Health Network, Inc., and the Board of Regents of the University of Michigan.
Plaintiff opposes all of the…
2Cases cited49 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Will v. Michigan Department of State PoliceSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by46 opinions
- In re Adobe Systems, Inc. Privacy LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2014
- In Re: Science Applications International Corp. (Saic) Backup Tape Data Theft LitigationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
- Enslin v. Coca-Cola Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2015
- Storm v. Paytime, Inc.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2015
- Peters v. St. Joseph Services Corp.District Court, S.D. Texas · 2015
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.