Shake v. Frito-Lay North America, Inc. et al
||Pepsico, Inc. and Frito-Lay North America, Inc.
||January 27, 2012
||US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
||Roanne L. Mann
||Roslynn R. Mauskopf
|Nature of Suit:
||Fraud or Truth-In-Lending
|Cause of Action:
||28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|August 29, 2013
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER in case 1:12-cv-00408-RRM-RLM; granting in part and denying in part (23) Motion to Dismiss in case 1:12-md-02413-RRM-RLM: For the reasons stated in the attached Memorandum and Order, defendants' motion to take judicial notice of certain documents is granted, and their motion to dismiss is granted in part and denied in part as follows: 1) All claims against defendant PepsiCo are dismissed without prejudice; 2) The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act claim (Count I) is dismissed with prejudice; 3) The New York General Business Law claims (Counts II and III) are dismissed with prejudice only as to non-New York plaintiffs; 4) The New York warranty claim (Count VIII) is dismissed with prejudice o nly as to non-New York plaintiffs. This claim is otherwise dismissed without prejudice; 5) The Florida warranty claim (Count X) is dismissed without prejudice; 6) The New York intentional misrepresentation claim (Count XI) is dismissed with prejud ice only as to non-New York plaintiffs. This claim is otherwise dismissed without prejudice; 7) The California and Florida intentional misrepresentation claims (Counts XII and XIII) are dismissed without prejudice; 8) To the extent the Unfair Co mpetition Law, False Advertising Law, Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act claims (Counts IV, V, VI, and VII) are predicated on "All Natural" representations appearing anywhere other than on the products' packaging, the claims are dismissed without prejudice; and 9) All other claims shall proceed consistent with this Memorandum and Order. Plaintiffs' request to amend is denied without prejudice to renew consistent with this Me morandum and Order. Discovery shall proceed pursuant to the Case Management Order under the supervision of the assigned magistrate judge. Ordered by Judge Roslynn R. Mauskopf on 8/29/2013. Associated Cases: 1:12-md-02413-RRM-RLM et al. (Mauskopf, Roslynn)
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system.
A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?