550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 273,590 times 368 Legal Analyses
Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing
478 U.S. 265 (1986) Cited 17,092 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that Ex parte Young would not support a suit against a state for ongoing liability for an alleged past breach of trust, since "continuing payment of the income from the lost corpus is essentially equivalent in economic terms to a one-time restoration of the lost corpus itself"
Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion "in denying a motion for a class action determination which was untimely under the local rule"
520 U.S. 968 (1997) Cited 3,452 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that "a plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunctive relief has a "requirement for substantial proof is much higher" than a defendant's summary judgment motion
526 U.S. 344 (1999) Cited 2,725 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that, where defendant was faxed a courtesy copy of a filed complaint, defendant's time to remove is not triggered "by mere receipt of the complaint unattended by any formal service"
28 U.S.C. § 636 Cited 513,122 times 40 Legal Analyses
Holding that when a party fails to object to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, our review of the district court's resulting decision is for plain error so long as the party "has been served with notice that [this consequence] will result from a failure to object"
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 Cited 71,368 times 127 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
This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the Uniform Trade Secrets Act. 12 Pa.C.S. § 5301 2004, Feb. 19, P.L. 143, No. 14, § 1, effective 4/19/2004.
Finding that a misappropriation plaintiff "must show that the defendant used or disclosed information that it knew or had reason to know was a trade secret and that the defendant acquired such information by improper means."