Whittlestone, Inc. v. Handi-Craft Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a motion to dismiss under Rule 12 □□□ (6) 16 is the appropriate means of disposing of an improper claim for 17 relief
• holding that “Rule 12(f) does not authorize district courts to strike claims for [consequential] damages” because such claims similarly don’t fit within any of Rule 12(f)’s categories
• holding that 2 Rule 12(f) “does not authorize a district court to dismiss a claim for damages on the 3 basis it is precluded as a matter of law”
• holding that Rule 12(f) 2 “does not authorize a district court to dismiss a claim for damages on the basis it is precluded as a 3 matter of law.”
• holding that non-viable damages claims are subject to a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss
• holding that non-viable damages claims are subject to a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

79 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

• Robert Pepper v. Apple, Inc.
  Ninth Circuit· 2017-01-12· cited 130×
• United States v. $133,420.00 in United States Currency
  Ninth Circuit· 2012-02-21· cited 111×
• Republic of Ecuador v. Douglas MacKay
  Ninth Circuit· 2014-01-31· cited 67×
• In re Nexus 6P Prods. Liab. Litig.
  N.D. California· 2018-03-05· cited 65×
• Sanchez v. City of Fresno
  E.D. California· 2012-12-26· cited 56×
• Scalia v. Cnty. of Kern
  E.D. California· 2018-04-10· cited 52×
• Cortina v. Goya Foods, Inc.
  S.D. California· 2015-03-19· cited 47×
• Gregory Village Partners, L.P. v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc.
  N.D. California· 2011-08-02· cited 44×
• Rees v. PNC Bank, N.A.
  N.D. California· 2015-04-07· cited 43×
• Hardy v. Lewis Gale Medical Center, LLC
  W.D. Virginia· 2019-03-27· cited 37×
• Sliger v. Prospect Mortgage, LLC
  E.D. California· 2011-05-27· cited 36×
• Clancy v. Bromley Tea Co.
  N.D. California· 2013-08-09· cited 36×
• Cotton v. City of Eureka
  N.D. California· 2012-03-16· cited 33×
• Romero v. Securus Technologies, Inc.
  S.D. California· 2016-10-24· cited 31×
• Williams v. County of Alameda
  N.D. California· 2014-02-10· cited 30×
• Rosen v. Masterpiece Marketing Group, LLC
  C.D. California· 2016-03-01· cited 29×
• In re Yahoo! Inc. Customer Data Sec. Breach Litig.
  N.D. California· 2018-03-09· cited 29×
• Herd v. Cnty. of San Bernardino
  C.D. California· 2018-04-27· cited 28×
• Nguyen v. CTS Electronics Manufacturing Solutions Inc.
  N.D. California· 2014-01-06· cited 28×
• In Re Toyota Motor Corp.
  C.D. California· 2011-05-13· cited 27×

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc.
  Supreme Court· 1994-03-01· cited 1,767×
• Evel Knievel Krystal Knievel v. Espn, a Subsidiary of Walt Disney, Inc.
  Ninth Circuit· 2005-01-04· cited 1,134×
• Fantasy, Inc. v. Fogerty
  Ninth Circuit· 1993-02-02· cited 552×
• Rutman Wine Company v. E. & J. Gallo Winery
  Ninth Circuit· 1987-09-30· cited 266×
• ASP Properties Group, L.P. v. Fard, Inc.
  California Court of Appeal· 2005-10-05· cited 148×
• Unnamed case
  Ninth Circuit· 1998-11-06· cited 139×
• Kootenai Tribe of Idaho v. Veneman
  Ninth Circuit· 2002-12-12· cited 101×
• Nurse v. United States
  Eighth Circuit· 2000-09-12· cited 84×
• Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 96,263 Frank S. Yamamoto, Individually And, Derivatively, on Behalf of Investors Finance, Inc. v. Kazuo Omiya
  Ninth Circuit· 1977-11-28· cited 79×
• Good Hope Missionary Baptist Church v. St. Louis Alarm Monitoring Co.
  Missouri Court of Appeals· 2010-03-16· cited 7×