Legal Opinion

Thaylia Donna Quinn v. Proctor & Gamble Co.; Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.; Target Corporation; and Does 1–100, inclusive

District Court, S.D. California

Decided January 5, 2026No. 3:24-cv-00856Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 THAYLIA DONNA QUINN, Case No.: 24-CV-856 JLS (SBC) individually, 12 ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND Plaintiff, 13 DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ v. MOTION TO DISMISS 14 PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED PROCTOR & GAMBLE CO.; WAL- 15 COMPLAINT MART STORES, INC.; TARGET 16 CORPORATION; and DOES 1–100, (ECF No. 23) inclusive, 17 Defendants. 18 19 Presently before the Court are Defendants Procter & Gamble Co.’s (“P&G”), Wal- 20 Mart Inc.’s, and Target Corporation’s (collectively, “Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss 21 Plaintiff’s…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Michael Lacey v. Joseph ArpaioCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
  4. Bartlett v. StricklandSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  5. United States v. Donald Lawrence Ritchie, Heather Horner, Claimant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003

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

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

Powered by the Exa API