In Re Apple & AT & T Ipad Unlimited Data Plan Litigation
District Court, N.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS THE MASTER CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO STRIKE [Re Docket No. 76]
RONALD M. WHYTE, District Judge.
Defendant AT & T Mobility LLC (“ATTM”) moves to dismiss the master consolidated complaint (“MCC”). On March 25, 2011, the court held a hearing to consider defendant’s motion. Having considered the papers submitted by the parties and the arguments of counsel, and for the reasons set forth below, the court grants in part and denies in part ATTM’s motion to dismiss and denies ATTM’s motion to strike.
I.…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Kearns v. Ford Motor Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USACourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- Kwikset Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2011
- Dallas Aerospace, Inc., Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant v. Cis Air Corporation, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2003
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- In re Apple Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2019
- Opperman v. Path, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2014
- In re Apple Inc. Device Performance Litig.District Court, N.D. California · 2018
- McVicar v. Goodman Global, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2014
- San Miguel v. HP Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2018
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.