Utah Division of Consumer Protection v. Stevens et al, No. 2:2019cv00441 - Document 65 (D. Utah 2019)

Court Description: ORDER granting 31 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. Signed by Judge Howard C. Nielson, Jr., on August 19, 2019. (mtw)

Download PDF
Dockets.Justia.com IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS , Utah Division of Consumer Protection v. Stevens et al Doc. 65 inter alia I. Id. Id. Id. Id. See Id. Id. et seq. et seq. See See id. II. See Holt v. United States Id Id Id III. See parens patriae parens patriae parens patriae Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno Massachusetts v. EPA Lujan Massachusetts First Alfred L. Snapp & Son, Inc. v. Puerto Rico Id See id see also id Massachusetts v. EPA Second Snapp Id. See, e.g Diamond v. Charles Snapp See id Third See Snapp parens patriae Id. Massachusetts parens patriae See parens patriae See Connecticut v. American Electric Power Company Inc. rev’d on other grounds Massachusetts parens patriae See Manitoba v. Bernhardt parens patriae [p]arens patriae Satsky v. Paramount Communications, Inc. Federal Practice and Procedure: Jurisdiction 2d accord Snapp parens patriae Snapp Id. Id. parens patriae See DaimlerChrysler Corp. parens patriae parens patriae Snapp Compare with Snapp Snapp parens patriae Snapp parens patriae Table Bluff Reservation v. Philip Morris, Inc. parens patriae Snapp See id id parens patriae See, e.g id group of individual residents injury to an identifiable injury to a sufficiently substantial segment of its population id. an alleged injury to the health and welfare of its citizens parens patriae parens patriae See, e.g. New York v. General Motors Corporation parens patriae Kelley v. Carr parens patriae aff’d in part and rev’d in part on other grounds parens patriae See Satsky patriae Parens not merely advancing the rights of individual injured citizens In re Electronic Books Antitrust Litigation parens patriae and their citizens’ concrete injury New York v. Microsoft must establish that its own citizens have suffered some injury parens patriae Snapp Snapp parens patriae See Snapp parens patriae Snapp Snapp parens patriae parens patriae See Snapp Parens patriae Connecticut v. American Electric Power Company Inc. parens patriae See rev’d on other grounds residents Id parens patriae its injured citizens Id but see Table Bluff Reservation parens patriae American Electric parens patriae Snapp American Electric see supra Massachusetts v. EPA parens patriae parens patriae Massachusetts parens patriae parens patriae Massachusetts parens patriae Lujan see also Table Bluff Reservation parens patriae parens patriae parens patriae IV. parens patriae parens patriae See See Morgan v. McCotter . Lexmark International See id that the interests of the residents of that State have been or are being threatened or adversely affected as parens patriae on behalf of its residents on behalf of residents of such State on behalf of its residents parens patriae F.A.A. v. Cooper parens patriae GFF Corp. v. Associated Wholesale Grocers, Inc. parens patriae that its such parens patriae only Hartford Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Union Planters Bank, N.A. prevent any person from violating a rule of the Commission under section 6102 Any person who violates such rule with respect to the offering or provision of a consumer financial product or service parens patriae Dep’t of Homeland Sec. v. MacLean V. Scarfo v. Ginsberg Estate of Harshman v. Jackson Hole Mountain Resort Corp. See * * * parens patriae See, e.g. iMergent, Inc. v. Giani Id.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.