Clean Coal Techs., Inc. v. Leidos, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• granting defendant’s motion to dismiss because “there 14 [was] no allegation that [the plaintiff] directed or commanded [the third-party] to breach” the contract
• dismissing tortious interference claim where the defendant had made an independent decision to breach the contract, even though the decision “may have been eased by certain actions taken by [other defendants]”
• “It is axiomatic that a complaint cannot be amended by the briefs in opposition to a motion to dismiss.” (citation omitted)
• plaintiff failed to allege procurement because there were no factual allegations that the third party directed, commanded, or set in motion the defendant’s alleged breach
• it is “axiomatic that a complaint cannot be amended by a brief in opposition to a motion to dismiss”
• it is “axiomatic that a complaint cannot be amended by a brief in opposition to a motion to dismiss” (quoting LLM Bar Exam, LLC v. Barbri, Inc., 271 F. Supp. 3d 547, 580 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).