§Why CasetextPricing

Mendoza v. UnitedHealth Group Incorporated et al

RESPONSE

28 Cited authorities

  1. Bowen v. Georgetown University Hospital

    488 U.S. 204 (1988)   Cited 1,716 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts will not defer to an agency's litigating position where it contradicts the agency's prior “regulations, rulings, or administrative practice”

  2. Mims v. Arrow Fin. Servs. LLC

    565 U.S. 368 (2012)   Cited 648 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "Congress did not deprive federal courts of federal-question jurisdiction over private TCPA suits"

  3. Astra USA, Inc. v. Santa Clara County

    563 U.S. 110 (2011)   Cited 201 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a contract claim based on the violation of a policy that merely incorporated statutory language was "in essence a suit to enforce the statute itself," and therefore unenforceable in a private action

  4. Satterfield v. Simon Schuster

    569 F.3d 946 (9th Cir. 2009)   Cited 418 times   25 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the FCC's interpretation that a text message is a "call" under the TCPA is reasonable

  5. Meyer v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC

    707 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 2012)   Cited 352 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a defendant violates the TCPA by calling a plaintiff's cellphone using an autodialing system without the plaintiff's consent

  6. Clark v. Cable

    523 F.3d 1110 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 294 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an action by a telephone user against a cable operator was within the primary jurisdiction of the F.C.C.

  7. Syntek Semiconductor Co. v. Microchip Tech., Inc.

    307 F.3d 775 (9th Cir. 2002)   Cited 237 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that cancellation of a copyright registration is an administrative remedy that must be sought from the Copyright Office

  8. Brown v. MCI WorldCom Network Services, Inc.

    277 F.3d 1166 (9th Cir. 2002)   Cited 169 times
    Holding that a stay would be appropriate if the claim "involves issues requiring resolution by the FCC"

  9. County of Santa Clara v. Astra USA, Inc.

    588 F.3d 1237 (9th Cir. 2009)   Cited 110 times
    Holding that a district court's discovery order compelling the production of documents would be a disclosure "required by law"

  10. Davel Commc'n, Inc. v. Qwest Corp.

    451 F.3d 1037 (9th Cir. 2006)   Cited 105 times
    Holding that "where . . . the allegations of the complaint do not necessarily require the doctrine's applicability, then the primary jurisdiction doctrine may not be applied on a motion to dismiss"

  11. Section 227 - Restrictions on use of telephone equipment

    47 U.S.C. § 227   Cited 5,664 times   733 Legal Analyses
    Granting exclusive jurisdiction to federal courts over actions brought by state attorney generals

  12. Section 554 - Adjudications

    5 U.S.C. § 554   Cited 1,035 times   31 Legal Analyses
    Granting authority to agencies to "issue a declaratory order to terminate a controversy or remove uncertainty."