Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 26 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Fountain v. Karim.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fountain v. Karim Anchor | green | “in resolving a motion to dismiss under rule 12(b)(1), the district court must take all uncontroverted facts in the complaint (or petition) as true, and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the party asserting jurisdiction.” | 9 |
| 2 | Muwekma Tribe v. Babbitt | green | “if a specific deadline for final agency action is provided by congress, the reasonableness of the delay can be measured in relation to this deadline.” | 8 |
| 3 | Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. United States Food & Drug Administration | green | “sets forth the test for determining if agency action is unreasonably delayed” | 6 |
| 4 | Chen v. Garland | green | “asks applicants to provide information about their personal and family backgrounds and details about the harm or mistreatment that they experienced in their home country” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.