Carlsbad Technology, Inc. v. Hif Bio, Inc., et al. (556 U.S. 635)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided May 4, 2009 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 556 U.S. 635 · 129 S. Ct. 1862
- Decided
- May 4, 2009
- Term
- October Term 2008
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Thomas
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court. In this case, we decide whether a federal court of appeals has jurisdiction to review a district court’s order that remands a case to state court after declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims under 28 U. S. C. § 1867(c). The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that appellate review of such an order is barred by § 1447(d) because it viewed the remand order in this case as resting on the District Court’s lack of subject-matter jurisdiction over the state-law claims. We disagree and reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals. I In 2005, respondents filed a complaint against petitioner and others in California state court, alleging that petitioner had violated state and federal law in connection with a patent dispute. Petitioner removed the case to the United States District Court for the Central District of California pursuant to § 1441(c), which allows removal of an “entire case” when it includes at least one claim over which the federal district court has original jurisdiction. Petitioner then filed a motion to dismiss the only federal claim in the lawsuit, which arose under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U. S. C. §§ 1961-1968, for failure to adequately allege a pattern of racketeering. HIF Bio, Inc. v. Yung Shin Pharmaceuticals Indus. Co., 508 F. 3d…
Excerpt of a 10,705-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.