Cases

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH No. 24-1570 AND MANUFACTURERS OF D.C. No. AMERICA, 6:19-cv-01996- MO Plaintiff - Appellee, v. OPINION ANDREW R. STOLFI, in his official capacity as Director of the Ore

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 17 - 36 (LLA) v. UNDER SEAL BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff, the Federal Deposit I

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 17 - 36 (LLA) v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”), brings this action against De

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RANCHERS-CATTLEMEN ACTION LEGAL FUND, UNITED STOCKGROWERS OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 20-2552 (RDM) v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal F

PRELIMINARY PRINT Volume 606 U. S. Part 2 Pages 656–747 OFFICIAL REPORTS OF THE SUPREME COURT June 27, 2025 Page Proof Pending Publication REBECCA A. WOMELDORF reporter of decisions NOTICE: This preliminary print is subject to formal revision before the bound volume is published. Users are

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2024 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit ____________ FILED July 24, 2024 No. 22-60008 Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Cle

MEMORANDUM OPINION JOHN D. BATES, United States District Judge INTRODUCTION .. .8 BACKGROUND.. .9 I. The Parties and Proposed Merger... 9 II. Original Medicare and Medicare Advantage.. .11 III. The Public Exchanges... 16 IV. Procedural History...

Case: 19-2326 Document: 82 Page: 1 Filed: 09/02/2020 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ ORACLE AMERICA, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant v. UNITED STATES, AMAZON WEB SERVICES, INC., Defendants-Appellees ______________________ 2019-2326 ______________________ Appeal from the Unite

MEMORANDUM OPINION BERYL A. HOWELL, United States District Judge The plaintiff, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (“PhRMA”), a trade association which “represents the country’s leading biophar-maceutical researchers and biotechnology companies,” see Compl. ¶¶ 9-10, ECF No. 1, seeks to set aside a Final

REVISED July 15, 2009 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED July 9, 2009 No. 08-2019

HOLMES, Circuit Judge. The False Claims Act (or the "Act") allows for the recovery of civil penalties *736 and treble damages from anyone who defrauds the government by submitting fraudulent claims for payment.

Money-Mandating Source of Law; Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1491(a)(1) (2006); Statute of Limitations, 28 U.S.C. § 2601 (2006); Waiver of Sovereign Immunity; State Taxation of Federal Property; Supremacy Clause, U.S. Const. Art. VI, cl. 2; Federal Facilities Section of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1323 (2006); Subject Matter Jurisdiction, RCFC 12(b)(1); Failure to State a Claim, RCFC 12(b)(6).

245 F.3d 327 (4th Cir. 2001) DTM RESEARCH, L.L.C., Plaintiff-Appellee,andUNITED STATES OF AMERICA,Intervenor-Appellee,v.AT&T; CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant. No. 00-1450 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT Argued: January 24, 2001Decided: March 27, 2001 Appeal from the United St

MEMORANDUM OPINION GRIFFITH, Circuit Judge: Table of Contents I. Background.............................................................138 II. Principles of Section 5 Analysis...........................................139 A.Retrogression.......................................................139 1. Texas’s Burden of Proof.......

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel., ) AARON J. WESTRICK, Ph.D., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 04-0280 (PLF)

PILLARD, Circuit Judge: The United States appeals its liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) for a portion of the cost of cleaning up hazardous substances at three California facilities owned by Lockheed Martin (Lockheed or the Company). The government’s involvement at the facilities dates to the Cold War, when the Depa

Dyk, Circuit Judge. Securiforce International America, LLC (“Securiforce”), a government. contractor, filed suit in the Court of Federal Claims (“Claims Court”) under the Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1491, and the Contract Disputes Act of 1978 (“CDA”), 41 U.S.C. §§ 7101-09. It sought a declaration that its contract for fuel delivery was improperly terminated

*57 OPINION ROSEMARY M. COLLYER, District Judge. After following the appropriate procedures under the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 U.S.C. § 16(b)-(h) (commonly known as the APPA or Tunney Act), the Government moves for entry of final judgment in this antitrust case. Mot.

OPINION STANCEU, Judge: Plaintiff■ EOS of North America; ■ Inc. (“EOS”) brought three actions, now consolidated, 1 challenging tariff classification decisions that United States Customs and Border Protection (“Customs”) made upon liquidating'EOS’s entries in 2007. Consol.