Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc. v. Wullschleger (604 U.S. 22)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided January 15, 2025 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 604 U.S. 22
- Decided
- January 15, 2025
- Term
- October Term 2024
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Kagan
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
(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 Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321 , 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus ROYAL CANIN U. S. A., INC., ET AL. v. WULLSCHLEGER ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 23–677. Argued October 7, 2024—Decided January 15, 2025 Respondent Anastasia Wullschleger sued petitioner Royal Canin U. S. A., Inc., in state court, alleging that Royal Canin had engaged in deceptive marketing practices. Her original complaint asserted claims based on both federal and state law. Royal Canin removed the case to federal court under 28 U. S. C. §1441 (a). That removal was premised on Wullschleger’s federal claim, which gave rise to federal-question ju- risdiction and also allowed the federal court to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Wullschleger’s factually intertwined state claims. §§1331, 1367. But federal court is not where Wullschleger wanted the case to be resolved. So she amended her complaint, deleting every mention of federal law, and petitioned the District Court…
Excerpt of a 49,463-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.