Legal Opinion
John Doe v. Nestle, S.A.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided October 23, 2018No. 17-55435PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The Opinion filed on October 23, 2018, is amended as follows:
IV. Plaintiffs Have Standing to Bring Their Claims
Defendants argue that plaintiffs lack Article III standing to bring their claims. To have standing, plaintiffs must allege "[ (1) ] a concrete and particularized injury [ (2) ] that is fairly traceable to the challenged conduct, [ (3) ] and is likely to be redressed by a favorable judicial decision." Consumer Fin. Prot. Bureau v. Gordon , 819 F.3d 1179, 1187 (9th Cir. 2016), cert. denied, (quoting Hollingsworth v. Perry , 570 U.S. 693, 704, 133 S.Ct. 2652, 186 L.Ed.2d 768 (2013) ).
Pla…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Federal Deposit Insurance v. MeyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Bennett v. SpearSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Correctional Services Corp. v. MaleskoSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Central Bank of Denver, N. A. v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Tomasella v. The Hershey Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2020
- Nestlé USA, Inc. v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 2021
- Alvarez Galvez v. Fanjul Corp.District Court, S.D. Florida · 2021
- Suhail Al Shimari v. CACI Premier Technology, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2026
- Unigestion Holding, S.A. v. UPM Technology, Inc.District Court, D. Oregon · 2019