Court filing
Motion to Dismiss — AAPS v. FDA
Summary
The federal defendants' motion to dismiss in Association of American Physicians & Surgeons v. Food & Drug Administration, et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-493-RJJ-SJB, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan, Southern Division, dated July 10, 2020 and filed 07/10/20 (ECF No. 10). The defendants ask the Court to dismiss the complaint under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. The motion says the grounds are set out in a brief filed at the same time. It is submitted by Justice Department Consumer Protection Branch trial attorney James W. Harlow, with HHS and FDA counsel listed of counsel.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Filed July 10, 2020 in Association of American Physicians & Surgeons v. Food & Drug Administration; one of 16 filings from this case.
Record facts
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan, Southern Division |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2020-07-10 |
Cite this document
“Motion to Dismiss — AAPS v. FDA.”
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan, Southern Division, filed 2020-07-10. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/court-filings/aaps-v-fda/2020-07-10-motion-to-dismiss/
, SHA-256 becf3cd5409e73612cde9fe2d66da836892ecf029ccec2cc62b78c0899bb550c.Full text
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, Plaintiff, v. Food & Drug Administration, et al., Defendants. Case No. 1:20-cv-493-RJJ-SJB Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction and Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted Defendants hereby move this Court to dismiss the complaint under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The grounds for this motion are fully set forth in Defendants’ contemporaneously filed brief. July 10, 2020 Respectfully submitted, OF COUNSEL: ROBERT P. CHARROW General Counsel STACY CLINE AMIN Deputy General Counsel U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Chief Counsel Food and Drug Administration ETHAN P. DAVIS Acting Assistant Attorney General MICHAEL D. GRANSTON Deputy Assistant Attorney General Civil Division GUSTAV W. EYLER Director ANDREW E. CLARK Assistant Director Case 1:20-cv-00493-RJJ-SJB ECF No. 10 filed 07/10/20 PageID.502 Page 1 of 3 2 ANNAMARIE KEMPIC Deputy Chief Counsel, Litigation SAMANTHA HONG SUSAN WILLIAMS Associate Chief Counsel Office of the General Counsel Food and Drug Division 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Silver Spring, MD 20993 s/ James W. Harlow JAMES W. HARLOW Trial Attorney Consumer Protection Branch U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 386 Washington, DC 20044-0386 (202) 514-6786 (202) 514-8742 (fax) James.W.Harlow@usdoj.gov Case 1:20-cv-00493-RJJ-SJB ECF No. 10 filed 07/10/20 PageID.503 Page 2 of 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that this document, filed through the CM/ECF system, will be sent via electronic mail to the registered participants as identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing. July 10, 2020 s/ James W. Harlow JAMES W. HARLOW Case 1:20-cv-00493-RJJ-SJB ECF No. 10 filed 07/10/20 PageID.504 Page 3 of 3
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.miwd.97901.10.0_1.pdf
- Size
- 64,060 bytes
- SHA-256
- becf3cd5409e73612cde9fe2d66da836892ecf029ccec2cc62b78c0899bb550c
- Original
- archive.org