Legal Opinion
Cantley v. Radiancy Inc.
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided August 8, 2016No. Civil Action No. 2016-1614Published
1Opinion of the Court
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 APRIL CANTLEY, individually and behalf ) Case No.: 1:15-cv-01649 - LJO – JLT of all other similarly situated, ) 12 ) ORDER LIFTING STAY Plaintiff, ) 13 ) ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION v. ) FOR A CHANGE OF VENUE 14 ) RADIANCY, INC., et al., ) (Doc. 24) 15 ) Defendants. ) 16 ) 17 Plaintiff April Cantley asserts Defendants Radiancy, Inc. and Photomedex, Inc. are liable for 18 false and misleading business practices in violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law, False 19 Advertising Law, and the Consumer…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Piper Aircraft Co. v. ReynoSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Van Dusen v. BarrackSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Jones v. GNC Franchising, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Continental Grain Co. v. Barge FBL-585Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Decker Coal Company v. Commonwealth Edison CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.