Federal Trade Commission v. Ken Roberts Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that a court asked to enforce a CID_must ensure that \the subject matter of the investigation is within the statutory jurisdiction of the subpoena- issuing agency\ (internal quotation marks omitted)
• describing Galliano as \relying on the First Amendment and the canon of constitutional doubt in holding that the [FECA] partially preempted the postal fraud prescriptions\
• finding “no express exclusive jurisdiction provision” in the IAA and, therefore, no preemption of the FTC’s power to investigate fraudulent trade practices by investment advisors
• reaffirming holding that “enforcement of an agen- cy’s investigatory subpoena will be denied only when there is ‘a patent lack of jurisdiction’ in an agency to regulate or to investigate”
• reaffirming holding that “enforcement of an agen- cy’s investigatory subpoena will be denied only when there is ‘a patent lack of jurisdiction’ in an agency to regulate or to investigate”
• \[W]e have held that enforcement of an agency’s investigatory subpoena will be denied only when there is ‘a patent lack of jurisdiction’ in an agency to regulate or to investigate.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).