Giglio v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• noting, but rejecting, defendant’s argument that its elimination of benefits for one category of participants constituted a termination of the prior plan and the institution of a new plan
• “A district court should not dismiss a pro se complaint 19 without leave to amend [pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii
• “Unless the named plaintiffs are themselves 19 entitled to seek injunctive relief, they may not represent a class seeking that 20 relief.”
• “This court will not substitute its opinion for the ALJ’s, who is 19 in a better position to gauge credibility and resolve conflicts in evidence.”
• “A district court should not dismiss a pro se complaint 19 without leave to amend [pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)] unless ‘it is absolutely 20 clear that the deficiencies of the complaint could not be cured by amendment.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).