Case Citator › Animal Legal Defense Fund v. U.S. Food & Drug Administration

Animal Legal Defense Fund v. U.S. Food & Drug Administration

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Good law
Court
Ninth Circuit
Citation
836 F.3d 987
Decided
Confirmed treatments
0
Flagged citations read
94 of 94
Citing cases (total)
219
Good law
Every flagged citation to this case has been read, and none of them overrules, limits, or questions it. Animal Legal Defense Fund v. U.S. Food & Drug Administration remains good law: all 94 flagged citations have been read, and none adversely treated the decision. The citing opinions applied its de novo standard for reviewing summary judgment or used it in history parentheticals reporting that Animal Legal Defense Fund itself overruled contrary portions of Church of Scientology, Yonemoto, Lion Raisins, GC Micro, and other earlier Ninth Circuit decisions.
More on how this was screened

Other citing opinions quoted unaffected rules from those older decisions, applied unrelated first-to-file doctrine, or were nonprecedential, superseded, or party-authored materials. No adverse entry survived review.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

219 later cases cite Animal Legal Defense Fund v. U.S. Food & Drug Administration; 94 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Animal Legal Defense Fund v. U.S. Food & Drug Administration?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

No reviewed court has overruled or limited this case.

Every one of the 94 flagged citations was read, and each turned out to be something other than adverse treatment: a routine application, a party's argument the court rejected, or the case itself discussing older law. That reading is the finding this page exists to report.

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Animal Legal Defense Fund v. U.S. Food & Drug Administration and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace