Simler v. Conner

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that there is no 41 authority in the First Circuit for grafting a cohesiveness requirement onto Rule 23(b)(2)
• noting that “the FDA has traditionally regarded state law as an 23 additional layer of consumer protection that complements FDA regulation”
• explaining that “the four traditional 23(a) factors embrace [the ascertainability] appraisal” and that “most courts do not independently address ‘administrative feasibility’ or ‘ascertainability’ ”
• finding a class ascertainable where members were smokers who were not being treated for lung cancer
• “The heart of the predominance inquiry is whether the ‘uncommon questions’ outweigh the commonalities.” (citation omitted)
• unclean-hands defense not available under the Act because it “has 16 not been applied where Congress authorizes broad equitable relief to serve important national 17 policies”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).