27 Cited authorities

Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr
518 U.S. 470 (1996) Cited 2,416 times 35 Legal Analyses
Holding that the presence of a state-law damages remedy for violations of FDA requirements does not impose an additional requirement upon medical device manufacturers but "merely provides another reason for manufacturers to comply with . . . federal law"
Crosby v. Nat'l Foreign Trade Council
530 U.S. 363 (2000) Cited 983 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that a state Burma sanctions bill conflicted with a federal Burma sanctions bill because it undermined Congress's delegation to the President of "flexible and effective authority" to adjust all sanctions in response to changing conditions
Silvas v. E*Trade Mortgage Corp.
514 F.3d 1001 (9th Cir. 2008) Cited 400 times
Holding that claims for unfair advertising and unfair competition brought pursuant to California's consumer protection statute were preempted by § 560.2(b)
Bank of Am. v. City Cty of San Francisco
309 F.3d 551 (9th Cir. 2002) Cited 252 times
Holding that HOLA preempts state law because "regulation by OTS has been so pervasive as to leave no room for state regulatory control"
Am. Trucking Ass'ns, Inc. v. City of L.A.
569 U.S. 641 (2013) Cited 52 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Court did not need to address whether “a freestanding ‘market-participant exception’ ” limited the express terms of a preemption clause, because the appellants had abandoned that argument, and concluding that the regulation at issue was preempted by the plain terms of the federal preemption clause
Chae v. SLM Corp.
593 F.3d 936 (9th Cir. 2010) Cited 146 times 3 Legal Analyses
Finding that "field preemption does not apply to the HEA"
City of Auburn v. United States
154 F.3d 1025 (9th Cir. 1998) Cited 124 times
Holding that an appeal was moot where a petitioner who was denied a hearing in one proceeding was able to raise its concerns in a separate petition for a declaratory order
Pacific Capital Bank v. Connecticut
542 F.3d 341 (2d Cir. 2008) Cited 86 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that a third-party tax preparer who facilitated the processing of refund anticipation loans for a national bank was not subject to Connecticut law regulating such loans
Whistler Inv. v. Depository Trust
539 F.3d 1159 (9th Cir. 2008) Cited 47 times
Finding plaintiff's claim preempted when that claim involved a "direct challenge to [agency]-approved rules"
Perry Capital LLC v. Lew
70 F. Supp. 3d 208 (D.D.C. 2014) Cited 28 times
Recognizing difference between FHFA conservatorship and receivership of GSEs and holding that FHFA is not acting as a receiver
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 328,681 times 158 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Section 1821 - Insurance Funds
12 U.S.C. § 1821 Cited 2,938 times 54 Legal Analyses
Granting FDIC standing to bring civil actions for money damages against the Bank's directors as the successor
Section 4617 - Authority over critically undercapitalized regulated entities
12 U.S.C. § 4617 Cited 666 times 4 Legal Analyses
Granting the FHFA the power to “operate” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and “to conduct all [of their] business”
Section 4511 - Establishment of the Federal Housing Finance Agency
12 U.S.C. § 4511 Cited 173 times
Establishing FHFA as "an independent agency of the Federal Government"
Section 1716 - Declaration of purposes of subchapter
12 U.S.C. § 1716 Cited 152 times
Limiting Fannie Mae’s purpose to the secondary market for residential mortgages
Section 1451 - Definitions
12 U.S.C. § 1451 Cited 76 times
Defining "Corporation" as "the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation created by this chapter"
Section 7.28.230 - Mortgagee cannot maintain action for possession-Possession to collect mortgaged, pledged, or assigned rents and profits-Perfection of security interest
Wash. Rev. Code § 7.28.230 Cited 57 times 2 Legal Analyses
Providing grounds for appointing a receiver to collect rent for application to mortgage
Section 4513 - Duties and authorities of Director
12 U.S.C. § 4513 Cited 33 times
Empowering Agency to place entities like Freddie Mac into conservatorship to protect nation's housing market and participate in litigation toward same end

Zamora Jordan v. Nationstar Mortgage, Llc

27 Cited authorities

Holding that the presence of a state-law damages remedy for violations of FDA requirements does not impose an additional requirement upon medical device manufacturers but "merely provides another reason for manufacturers to comply with . . . federal law"

Holding that a state Burma sanctions bill conflicted with a federal Burma sanctions bill because it undermined Congress's delegation to the President of "flexible and effective authority" to adjust all sanctions in response to changing conditions

Holding that claims for unfair advertising and unfair competition brought pursuant to California's consumer protection statute were preempted by § 560.2(b)

Holding that HOLA preempts state law because "regulation by OTS has been so pervasive as to leave no room for state regulatory control"

Finding that "field preemption does not apply to the HEA"

Holding that an appeal was moot where a petitioner who was denied a hearing in one proceeding was able to raise its concerns in a separate petition for a declaratory order

Holding that a third-party tax preparer who facilitated the processing of refund anticipation loans for a national bank was not subject to Connecticut law regulating such loans

Finding plaintiff's claim preempted when that claim involved a "direct challenge to [agency]-approved rules"

Recognizing difference between FHFA conservatorship and receivership of GSEs and holding that FHFA is not acting as a receiver

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Granting FDIC standing to bring civil actions for money damages against the Bank's directors as the successor

Granting the FHFA the power to “operate” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and “to conduct all [of their] business”

Establishing FHFA as "an independent agency of the Federal Government"

Limiting Fannie Mae’s purpose to the secondary market for residential mortgages

Defining "Corporation" as "the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation created by this chapter"

Providing grounds for appointing a receiver to collect rent for application to mortgage

Empowering Agency to place entities like Freddie Mac into conservatorship to protect nation's housing market and participate in litigation toward same end