Clark v. Time Warner Cable

How courts have described this case

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

• referring matter to agency where issue was novel, agency regarded resolution of issue as important to policies it was required to implement, and agency had issue under active consideration
• “To state a RICO claim, one must allege a 11 ‘pattern’ of racketeering activity, which requires at least two predicate acts.”
• “[T]he doctrine is not designed to secure expert advice from agencies every time a court is presented with an issue conceivably within the agency’s ambit.” (cleaned up)
• “This court ‘will not ordinarily consider matters on appeal that are not specifically and distinctly argued in appellant’s opening brief.’” (quoting Kim v. Kang, 154 F.3d 996, 1000 (9th Cir. 1998))
• internal quotation marks and citation 24 25 2 Defendant discusses agency action undertaken by the FDA in addition to the EPA, but Defendant 26 ultimately argues only that “this Court should dismiss (or alternatively stay

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).