§Why CasetextPricing

Force et al v. Facebook Inc.

REPLY in Support re Notice of MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12

47 Cited authorities

  1. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 270,937 times   367 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "

  2. Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins

    578 U.S. 330 (2016)   Cited 7,650 times   440 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a statutory violation, without more, did not give rise to Article III standing

  3. Daimler AG v. Bauman

    571 U.S. 117 (2014)   Cited 5,763 times   237 Legal Analyses
    Holding that foreign corporations may not be subject to general jurisdiction "whenever they have an in-state subsidiary or affiliate"

  4. Walden v. Fiore

    571 U.S. 277 (2014)   Cited 4,410 times   49 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “the mere fact that [defendant's] conduct affected plaintiffs with connections to the forum State does not suffice to authorize jurisdiction.”

  5. Almendarez-Torres v. United States

    523 U.S. 224 (1998)   Cited 6,552 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the fact of a prior conviction is not an element of an offense even when it increases a defendant's statutory maximum term of imprisonment

  6. Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd.

    561 U.S. 247 (2010)   Cited 1,481 times   177 Legal Analyses
    Holding extraterritorial application of a statute is a merits question, not a question of subject matter jurisdiction

  7. Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency

    549 U.S. 497 (2007)   Cited 1,169 times   97 Legal Analyses
    Holding that denials of petitions for rulemaking are judicially reviewable

  8. Nat'l Assoc. Home v. Defenders of Wildlife

    551 U.S. 644 (2007)   Cited 879 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a stray erroneous statement in the Federal Register "which could have had no effect on the underlying agency action being challenged" is not "the type of error that requires a remand"

  9. Paroline v. United States

    572 U.S. 434 (2014)   Cited 624 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that restitution is "proper under § 2259 only to the extent the defendant's offense proximately caused a victim's losses"

  10. Hui v. Castaneda

    559 U.S. 799 (2010)   Cited 438 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that PHS officers and employees are "absolute[ly] immun[e] ... for actions arising out of the performance of medical or related functions within the scope of their employment"

  11. Rule 4 - Summons

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 4   Cited 70,485 times   126 Legal Analyses
    Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time

  12. Section 230 - Protection for private blocking and screening of offensive material

    47 U.S.C. § 230   Cited 1,040 times   168 Legal Analyses
    Limiting liability

  13. Section 2333 - Civil remedies

    18 U.S.C. § 2333   Cited 473 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Granting any ATA claimant the right to sue "in any appropriate district court of the United States"

  14. Section 2334 - Jurisdiction and venue

    18 U.S.C. § 2334   Cited 62 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Applying the PSJVTA to any successor or affiliate of the PA that "holds itself out to be ... the 'State of Palestine'"