Gen-Probe, Inc. v. Amoco Corp., Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “lumping together of multiple defendants in one broad allegation fails to satisfy [the] notice requirement of Rule 8(a)(2)”
• explaining that “under either the [Professional Real Estate 11 Investors] or the USS-POSCO test, [the plaintiff] ... must demonstrate objective baselessness” because 12 the pattern of claims must be “baseless as a whole”
• finding complaint did not provide sufficient notice when it was unclear which claims applied to which defendants
• collecting cases and finding that Noerr immunity is “constitutional and rooted in the First Amendment right to petition”
• collecting cases and finding that Noerr immunity is “constitutional and rooted in the First Amendment right to petition”
• collecting cases in which “th[e] confusion 26 of which claims apply to which defendants would require that the complaint be dismissed 27 with leave to file an amended complaint.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).