Quinn
Thaylia Donna Quinn v. Proctor & Gamble Co.; Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.; Target Corporation; and Does 1–100, inclusive
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 THAYLIA DONNA QUINN, Case No.: 24-CV-856 JLS (SBC) individually,
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
Plaintiff, DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ v. MOTION TO DISMISS
PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED
PROCTOR & GAMBLE CO.; WAL-
COMPLAINT
MART STORES, INC.; TARGET
CORPORATION; and DOES 1–100, (ECF No. 23) inclusive, 17 Defendants. 18 Presently before the Court are Defendants Procter & Gamble Co.’s (“P&G”), Wal- Mart Inc.’s, and Target Corporation’s (collectively, “Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (“Mot.,” ECF No. 23). Plaintiff Thaylia Donna Quinn filed an Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (“Opp’n,” ECF No. 26), to which Defendants filed a Reply in Support of the Motion (“Reply,” ECF No. 27). Having carefully reviewed Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (“FAC,” ECF No. 21), the Parties’ arguments, and the law, the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES …