Cardinal Health, Inc. v. Holder

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding argument about irreparable harm to consumers “fails because it shows irreparable harm not to [plaintiff], but to third parties”
• holding argument about irreparable harm “fails because it shows irreparable harm not to [plaintiff], but to third parties”
• presuming that the administrative record is complete absent “clear evidence to the contrary”
• finding alleged loss of $1 billion insufficient in the context of movant’s $102 billion revenue
• finding no irreparable harm where the plaintiff “shows irreparable harm not to [the plaintiff], but to third parties”
• addressing direct challenge by a DEA registrant to an immediate suspension order

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).