Pa. Complaint vs. GOP Amended to Add Supplemental Jurisdiction Language
The U.S. District Court for Eastern Pennsylvania “has supplemental jurisdiction of the common law claims” of plaintiff Mark Fidanza and his proposed putative class, said his first amended Telephone Consumer Protection Act complaint Tuesday (docket 2:22-cv-05185). His claims “are so…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
related to federal claims in the action that they form part of the same case or controversy under Article III” of the Constitution, it said. Fidanza alleges the Republican Committee of Chester County, Pennsylvania, bombarded him with dozens of unsolicited text messages in the run-up to the Nov. 8 election even though he’s registered to vote in the state's Montgomery County and never voted in Chester County. His original Dec. 28 complaint (see 2212280028) didn’t contain the language on supplemental jurisdiction. The GOP committee hasn't answered Fidanza's original complaint.