P. A. B. Produits et Appareils de Beaute v. Satinine Societa in Nome Collettivo di S.A. e. M. Usellini

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “[t]he burden of proving subject matter jurisdiction on a motion to dismiss is on the plaintiff, the party asserting jurisdiction.”
• holding that a trial court may go beyond allegations of the complaint and hold an evidentiary hearing if it is contended that the jurisdictional allegations of the complaint are not true
• holding that a trial court may go beyond allegations of the complaint and hold an evidentiary hearing if it is contended that the jurisdictional allegations of the complaint are not true
• holding that where factual disputes relating to standing were “so intertwined with the facts upon which the ultimate issues on the merits must be resolved, that 12(b)(1) is an inappropriate basis upon which to ground the dismissal.”
• explaining that “it may be contended that a complaint simply fails to allege facts upon which subject matter jurisdiction can be based”
• noting that the second way to challenge jurisdiction under 12(b)(1) is to argue “that the jurisdictional allegations” are “not true”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).