Mark Levy, Derivatively on Behalf of Immunogen Inc. v. Southbrook International Investments, Ltd. And Immunogen, Inc., Nominal-Defendant-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that it was “appropriate for the district court to refer to the documents attached to the motion to dismiss since the documents were referred to in the complaint”
• holding that Section 16(b) should be construed “only within narrowly drawn limits” (quotation marks omitted)
• holding that it was “appropriate for the district court to refer to the documents attached to the motion to dismiss since the documents were referred to in the complaint”
• holding that it was “appropriate for the district court to refer to the documents attached to the motion to dismiss since the documents were referred to in the complaint”
• stating that “dismissal is appropriate if the plaintiff can prove no set of facts that would entitle him to relief’
• “Section 1983 creates a private right of action against 11 individuals who, acting under color of state law, violate federal constitutional or statutory 12 rights.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).