38 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 252,784 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
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 266,697 times 365 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' "
Carnegie-Mellon Univ. v. Cohill
484 U.S. 343 (1988) Cited 11,123 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding district courts have discretion whether to dismiss state law claims after all the federal claims are dismissed and explaining the factors courts should consider when doing so
Malleus v. George
641 F.3d 560 (3d Cir. 2011) Cited 2,627 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding inquiry is normally broken into three parts: identifying the elements of a claim, reviewing the complaint to strike conclusory allegations, and then looking at the well-pleaded components of the complaint and evaluating whether all of the elements identified in part one of the inquiry are sufficiently alleged.
Mayer v. Belichick
605 F.3d 223 (3d Cir. 2010) Cited 2,312 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding we must only consider documents if complainant's claims are based upon these documents
Hedges v. Musco
204 F.3d 109 (3d Cir. 2000) Cited 874 times
Holding that District Courts "must" decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims "unless considerations of judicial economy, convenience, and fairness to the parties provide an affirmative justification for doing so."
Bright v. Westmoreland County
380 F.3d 729 (3d Cir. 2004) Cited 133 times
Holding that a district court's adoption of a prevailing party's proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law is not per se reversible error but explaining that the "findings of fact adopted by the court must be the result of the trial judge's independent judgment"
Sandusky Wellness Center, LLC v. Medco Health Solutions, Inc.
788 F.3d 218 (6th Cir. 2015) Cited 83 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that two faxes listing medications available in the health plans of the plaintiff chiropractor's patients were not advertisements
Stonecrafters v. Foxfire Printing Packaging
633 F. Supp. 2d 610 (N.D. Ill. 2009) Cited 38 times
Finding that unsolicited fax advertisements are neither immoral, unethical, oppresive, nor unscrupulous
Phillips Randolph v. Adler-Weiner Research Chicago
526 F. Supp. 2d 851 (N.D. Ill. 2007) Cited 41 times
Holding that fax offering $200 honorarium for participating in "research discussion" as part of "research study" is not an advertisement because it "does not promote a ‘commercially available service,’ but a research study"
Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 Cited 345,981 times 922 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Section 1367 - Supplemental jurisdiction
28 U.S.C. § 1367 Cited 61,786 times 78 Legal Analyses
Holding that in civil actions proceeding in federal court based solely on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the district court "shall not have supplemental jurisdiction" over "claims by plaintiffs against persons made parties under Rule . . . 24" or "over claims by persons . . seeking to intervene as plaintiffs under Rule 24," if "exercising supplemental jurisdiction over such claims would be inconsistent with the jurisdictional requirements of section 1332"
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

Robert W. Mauthe, M.D., P.C. v. Optum, Inc. et al

38 Cited authorities

Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

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' "

Holding district courts have discretion whether to dismiss state law claims after all the federal claims are dismissed and explaining the factors courts should consider when doing so

Holding we must only consider documents if complainant's claims are based upon these documents

Holding that District Courts "must" decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims "unless considerations of judicial economy, convenience, and fairness to the parties provide an affirmative justification for doing so."

Holding that a district court's adoption of a prevailing party's proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law is not per se reversible error but explaining that the "findings of fact adopted by the court must be the result of the trial judge's independent judgment"

Holding that two faxes listing medications available in the health plans of the plaintiff chiropractor's patients were not advertisements

Finding that unsolicited fax advertisements are neither immoral, unethical, oppresive, nor unscrupulous

Holding that fax offering $200 honorarium for participating in "research discussion" as part of "research study" is not an advertisement because it "does not promote a ‘commercially available service,’ but a research study"

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Granting exclusive jurisdiction to federal courts over actions brought by state attorney generals