Ringo v. Lombardi’s Empirical Analysis
2010
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 301 (Animal Drug Amendments of 1968) · 21 U.S.C. § 337 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 353 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 355 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 801 (§ 101 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 812 (§ 202 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 829 (§ 309 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Relies on Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Friends of the Earth Incorporateds v. Laidlaw Environmental Services Inc · Heckler v. Chaney · Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Thompson Ex Rel. Thompson
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.