No. 18-904
King Law Group, PLLC, et al. v. M2 Technology, Incorporated
Response Waived
Tags: bell-v-hood circuit-split civil-procedure federal-jurisdiction jurisdiction jurisdictional-facts merits merits-overlap procedural-standard standing steel-co-v-citizens-for-a-better-environment subject-matter-jurisdiction
Latest Conference:
2019-02-22
Question Presented (from Petition)
In light of the Steel Co. rule that jurisdiction must be determined as "an antecedent" matter, what is the proper procedure for handling situations in which jurisdictional and merits facts overlap.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
What is the proper procedure for handling situations in which jurisdictional and merits facts overlap?
Docket Entries
2019-02-25
Petition DENIED.
2019-02-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/22/2019.
2019-01-28
Waiver of right of respondent M2 Technology, Inc. to respond filed.
2019-01-18
Blanket Consent filed by Petitioners, King Law Group, PLLC, et al..
2019-01-04
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 11, 2019)
Attorneys
King Law Group, PLLC, et al.
Richard Carroll King Jr. — King Law Group, PLLC, Petitioner
M2 Technology, Inc.
John Gabrielides — Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Respondent