that it would not have any effect on Tecfidera sales, Rather, it alleges that defendants misrepresented and omitted the alleged substantial effect that the PML death was having on Tecfidera sales. The dispute is essentially one of degree, and the Court will not dismiss the claim on those grounds. 15 . The alleged misrepresentations in paragraphs 108, 113, and 131 of the complaint will be discussed in the section below concerning puffery. 16 . See also In re Apple Computer, Inc., 127 Fed.Appx. 296, 304 (9th Cir.2005) ("We have held the following similar statements to be non-actionable puffery: ‘We're doing well and I think we have a great future’; ... 'Old products are doing very well.’” (emphasis added)); In re Ubiquiti Networks, Inc. Sec. Litig., 33 F.Supp.3d 1107, 1133 (N.D.Cal.2014) (<HOLDING>). 17 . The statements at issue concern the
holding that the sentence was reasonable in part because it was well below the statutory maximum holding how long and upon what terms a statecreated corporation may continue to exist is a matter exclusively of state power holding that what is important is not simply that the element at issue is defined in terms of what it does but that the term as the name for a structure has a reasonably well understood meaning in the art holding that a defendants sentence was reasonable in part because it was well below the statutory maximum holding that defendants statement to analysts those countries all continue to do well for us was puffing in part because he omitted any mention of why how under what standard or compared to what those markets were doing well emphasis added