Notes of Decisions
Cited in
127
cases (
34 in the last 5 years), 1991–2026 · leading case:
United States v. Bedi, 15 F.4th 222 (2d Cir. 2021).
United States v. Bedi, 15 F.4th 222 (2d Cir. 2021).
· cites it 7× “12 28 U.S.C. § 3002 (3)(B). 7 No. 20-1955-cv Government’s complaint, arguing that the agency’s award of back wages was not “owing to the United States” as required by the plain text of the FDCPA.”
United States v. Badger, 818 F.3d 563 (10th Cir. 2016).
· cites it 2× “at 802; see also 28 U.S.C. § 3002 (3). Although the defendants argued that disgorgement could be considered either “restitution” or an “other source of indebtedness to the United States,” both of which fall under the FDCPA definition of debt, the court rejected both arguments.”
Florance v. Buchmeyer, 500 F. Supp. 2d 618 (N.D. Tex. 2007).
· cites it 3× “To the extent that Plaintiff relies on § 3002(15) to sue the USA, it does not apply because § 3002 is simply a definitions statute in the chapter that authorizes the USA to “(1) recover a judgment on a debt; or (2) to obtain, before judgment on a claim for a debt, a remedy in…”
Jeremy Meyers v. Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wi, 836 F.3d 818 (7th Cir. 2016).
“§§6901 , 6903(13)(A), 6903(15); 6 Fair Debt Collection Procedures Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 3002 (7), 3002(10) (defining “person” to include “a natural person (including an individual Indian) .”
United States Small Bus. Admin. v. Bensal, 853 F.3d 992 (9th Cir. 2017).
· cites it 3× “28 U.S.C. § 3002 (3). Because the statute is written in the disjunctive, an amount owed constitutes a “debt” as long as it satisfies either subsection (A) or subsection (B).”
United States ex rel. Doe v. DeGregorio, 510 F. Supp. 2d 877 (M.D. Fla. 2007).
· cites it 5× “” 28 U.S.C. § 3002 (4) (emphasis added). A “[cjlaim” is defined in subchapter D of the FDCPA as “a right to payment, whether or not the right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured…”
United States v. Witham, 648 F.3d 40 (1st Cir. 2011).
· cites it 4× “” 28 U.S.C. § 3002 (3); United States v. Witham, 757 F.”
United States v. Rostoff, 164 F.3d 63 (1st Cir. 1999).
· cites it 3× “See 28 U.S.C. § 3002 (3)(B). In Bongiomo, we held, however, that certain restitution debts did not qualify for collection using the FDCPA.”
United States v. Timilty, 148 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 1998).
· cites it 3× “See 28 U.S.C. § 3002 (3). The government is not left without recourse, according to Timilty; it must first reduce each restitution order to a civil judgment and then it may seek to enforce that judgment.”
Reading v. United States, 506 F. Supp. 2d 13 (D.D.C. 2007).
· cites it 2× “§ 1367 (supplemental jurisdiction); 28 U.S.C. § 3002 (15)(a) (provision defining “United States”); Fed.”
28 U.S.C. § 3002(15): 2 cases
Class, No. 1:25-cv-00077 (M.D.N.C. June 1, 2026).
28 U.S.C. § 3002(3)(B): 2 cases
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.