§Why CasetextPricing

Perrero v. HCL America, Inc. et al

RESPONSE in Opposition re MOTION to Dismiss Complaint

44 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 252,709 times   279 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

  2. Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co.

    473 U.S. 479 (1985)   Cited 4,226 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the fact that a statute can be "applied in situations not expressly anticipated by Congress does not demonstrate ambiguity. It demonstrates breadth."

  3. Boyle v. United States

    556 U.S. 938 (2009)   Cited 1,134 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a RICO enterprise "need not have a hierarchical structure or a 'chain of command'; decisions may be made on an ad hoc basis and by any number of methods — by majority vote, consensus, a show of strength, etc."

  4. United States v. Turkette

    452 U.S. 576 (1981)   Cited 2,718 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a RICO enterprise must exist "separate and apart" from the pattern of racketeering activity

  5. Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. Seb S. A.

    563 U.S. 754 (2011)   Cited 803 times   65 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a finding of deliberate ignorance requires the defendant to "take deliberate actions to avoid learning of [wrongdoing]."

  6. Salinas v. United States

    522 U.S. 52 (1997)   Cited 1,207 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the canon of construction requiring a clear statement to alter the federal-state balance of criminal jurisdiction "does not warrant a departure from terms" where the statute's "text . . . is unambiguous on the point under consideration"

  7. Anza v. Ideal Steel Supply Corp.

    547 U.S. 451 (2006)   Cited 848 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a business could not recover against its competitor for a scheme to defraud the New York State tax authority that allowed the defendant to undercut the plaintiff's prices

  8. National Organization for Women, Inc. v. Scheidler

    510 U.S. 249 (1994)   Cited 949 times
    Holding that "RICO contains no economic motive requirement"

  9. Lewis v. City of Chi.

    560 U.S. 205 (2010)   Cited 234 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding Evans and its progeny "establish only that a Title VII plaintiff must show a present violation within the limitations period"

  10. Davis v. Town of Lake Park

    245 F.3d 1232 (11th Cir. 2001)   Cited 888 times
    Holding that job performance memoranda rarely constitute adverse employment actions

  11. Section 1101 - Definitions

    8 U.S.C. § 1101   Cited 16,349 times   91 Legal Analyses
    Finding notice and comment rulemaking is required for the agency's interim rule recognizing fear of coercive family practices as basis for refugee status

  12. Section 1961 - Definitions

    18 U.S.C. § 1961   Cited 14,951 times   72 Legal Analyses
    Defining what the terms “person” and “enterprise” include

  13. Section 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

    8 U.S.C. § 1182   Cited 9,713 times   66 Legal Analyses
    Holding deportable aliens who have been convicted of "crimes involving moral turpitude"

  14. Section 1001 - Statements or entries generally

    18 U.S.C. § 1001   Cited 7,332 times   300 Legal Analyses
    Making false statements

  15. Section 1324 - Bringing in and harboring certain aliens

    8 U.S.C. § 1324   Cited 3,341 times   43 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any person who "transports . . . or attempts to transport" an alien who has entered the United States in violation of the law

  16. Section 1546 - Fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents

    18 U.S.C. § 1546   Cited 1,238 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Penalizing false statement in immigration documents

  17. Section 1601.28 - Notice of right to sue: Procedure and authority

    29 C.F.R. § 1601.28   Cited 571 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Describing exception to usual proceeding of terminating investigation upon issuance of notice of right-to-sue

  18. Section 655.732 - What is the second LCA requirement, regarding working conditions?

    20 C.F.R. § 655.732   Cited 3 times   4 Legal Analyses

    An employer seeking to employ H-1B nonimmigrants in specialty occupations or as fashion models of distinguished merit and ability shall state on Form ETA 9035 or 9035E that the employment of H-1B nonimmigrants will not adversely affect the working conditions of workers similarly employed in the area of intended employment. For the purposes of this section, "H-1B" includes "E-3 and H-1B1" as well. (a)Establishing the working conditions requirement. The second LCA requirement shall be satisfied when