Christiansen

Christiansen v. Kimberly-Clark Corporation

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 19, 20243:23-cv-01095California3,457 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 KIM CHRISTIANSEN, Case No. 23-cv-01095-AMO

8 Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

9 v. DENYING IN PART MOTIONS TO

DISMISS

10 KIMBERLY-CLARK CORPORATION, et al., Re: Dkt. Nos. 31, 32 11 Defendants.

12 13 Before the Court are Defendant Kimberly-Clark Corporation’s motion to dismiss and 14 Defendant Target Corporation’s motion to dismiss. The matters are fully briefed and suitable for 15 decision without oral argument. See Civil L.R. 7-6. Having read the parties’ papers and carefully 16 considered their arguments and the relevant legal authority, the Court hereby GRANTS IN PART 17 AND DENIES IN PART the motion to dismiss for the following reasons. 18 I. BACKGROUND1 19 Plaintiff Kim Christiansen purchased Cottonelle Flushable Wipes from Target Corporation 20 (“Target”) on October 8, 2020. First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) (ECF 30) ¶ 14. Kimberly- 21 Clark Corporation (“Kimberly-Clark”) designs, manufactures, and sells Flushable Wipes,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.