18 Cited authorities

Schiavone v. Fortune
477 U.S. 21 (1986) Cited 762 times
Holding that in order to relate back "the basic claim must have arisen out of the conduct set forth in the original pleading"
Hagan v. Rogers
570 F.3d 146 (3d Cir. 2009) Cited 446 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the PLRA "cannot be deemed to exclude [in forma pauperis] prisoner litigants from Rule 20 joinder as a matter of law"
Farina v. Nokia Inc.
625 F.3d 97 (3d Cir. 2010) Cited 242 times 2 Legal Analyses
Finding that, even though plaintiff "attempts to characterize his claims as consumer claims based only on false and misleading statements, ... he necessarily must establish that cell phones abiding by the FCC's SAR guidelines are unsafe to operate ... and "[w]hether or not [he] intends to expressly challenge the FCC standards at trial, the inescapable effect of his complaint is to do so"
Braud v. Transport Service Co. of Illinois
445 F.3d 801 (5th Cir. 2006) Cited 126 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that, where the removing defendant was added after CAFA's effective date and then was later dismissed from the action, the district court could properly maintain jurisdiction over the "action" with regard to the remaining preCAFA defendants
Codex Corp. v. Milgo Electronic Corp.
553 F.2d 735 (1st Cir. 1977) Cited 167 times
Holding that orders granting or denying venue transfer are customarily not appealable as of right
Wacoh Co. v. Kionix Inc.
845 F. Supp. 2d 597 (D. Del. 2012) Cited 39 times
Finding public policy argument to be inapplicable where "the corporation that has chosen Delaware is not a Delaware corporation, and the corporations that might want to claim the benefits of being a Delaware corporation do not want to do so in this case."
Prime Care of Northeast v. Humana Ins. Co.
447 F.3d 1284 (10th Cir. 2006) Cited 37 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the effect of post-CAFA amendments should be a function of whether they relate back to the pre-CAFA filing"
MyMail, Ltd. v. America Online, Inc.
223 F.R.D. 455 (E.D. Tex. 2004) Cited 32 times 1 Legal Analyses
Finding joinder proper under Rule 20 but concluding "[w]hen discovery is complete, the Court, upon motion of a party, will determine whether the state of the evidence compels severance of some type under Rule 21"
Ochoa-Carrillo v. Gonzales
437 F.3d 842 (8th Cir. 2006) Cited 20 times
Recognizing jurisdictional authority
Philips Electronics North America Corp. v. Contec Corp.
220 F.R.D. 415 (D. Del. 2004) Cited 10 times
Granting defendant's motion for severance and a separate trial in a patent infringement case
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 164,069 times 197 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings
Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 Cited 94,896 times 92 Legal Analyses
Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint

Cyberfone Systems LLC v. Federal Express Corporation et al

18 Cited authorities

Holding that in order to relate back "the basic claim must have arisen out of the conduct set forth in the original pleading"

Holding that the PLRA "cannot be deemed to exclude [in forma pauperis] prisoner litigants from Rule 20 joinder as a matter of law"

Holding that, where the removing defendant was added after CAFA's effective date and then was later dismissed from the action, the district court could properly maintain jurisdiction over the "action" with regard to the remaining preCAFA defendants

Holding that orders granting or denying venue transfer are customarily not appealable as of right

Finding public policy argument to be inapplicable where "the corporation that has chosen Delaware is not a Delaware corporation, and the corporations that might want to claim the benefits of being a Delaware corporation do not want to do so in this case."

Holding that "the effect of post-CAFA amendments should be a function of whether they relate back to the pre-CAFA filing"

Finding joinder proper under Rule 20 but concluding "[w]hen discovery is complete, the Court, upon motion of a party, will determine whether the state of the evidence compels severance of some type under Rule 21"

Recognizing jurisdictional authority

Granting defendant's motion for severance and a separate trial in a patent infringement case

Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint