Legal Opinion
Gisvold v. Merck & Co.
District Court, S.D. California
Decided November 25, 2014No. Case No. 14cv1371 DMS (JLB)PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
DANA M. SABRAW, District Judge.
Pending before the Court in this putative consumer class action is Defendants’ Merck & Co., Inc., MSD Consumer Care Inc., and Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.’s (collectively “Merck Defendants” or “Merck”) motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”). Plaintiff Danika Gisvold filed an opposition and Defendants replied. The motion came on for hearing on November 4, 2014. James Patterson appeared on Plaintiffs behalf; David Stanley appeared on behalf of Defendants. Upon consideration of the briefing and oral argument, and for the…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Navarro v. BlockCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- Medtronic, Inc. v. LohrSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Eckler v. Neutrogena Corp. CA2/7California Court of Appeal · 2015
- Curran v. Bayer Healthcare LLCDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2019
- DeCostanzo v. GlaxoSmithKline PLCDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2022
- Eckler v. Neutrogena Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2015
- Navarro v. Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 2025