Case Law Pinney v. Nokia, Inc.

Pinney v. Nokia, Inc.

Document Cited Authorities (85) Cited in (523) Related

Michael R. Allweiss, Lowe, Stein, Hoffman, Allweiss & Hauver, L.L.P., New Orleans, Louisiana, for Appellants. Kenneth Winston Starr, Kirkland & Ellis, L.L.P., Washington, D.C., for Appellees.

ON BRIEF:

H. Russell Smouse, John C.M. Angelos, Glenn E. Mintzer Law Offices of Peter G. Angelos, P.C., Baltimore, Maryland; H. Thomas Howell, Howell & Gately, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellants. Garrett B. Johnson, Terrence J. Dee, Michael B. Slade, Kirkland & Ellis, L.L.P., Chicago, Illinois, for Motorola, Inc. Seamus C. Duffy, Mary Catherine Roper, Drinker, Biddle & Reath, L.L.P., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for Cingular Wireless, Inc., SBC Communications, Inc. Mark F. Horning, Thomas M. Barba, Steptoe & Johnson, Washington, D.C., for AT & T Corp., AT & T Wireless PCS, LLC and AT & T Wireless Services, Inc. John H. Beisner, Brian P. Brooks, O'Melveny & Meyers, L.L.P., Washington, D.C., for Verizon Wireless, Cellco Partnership. Paul F. Strain, Venable, Baetjer and Howard, L.L.P., Baltimore, Maryland; M. King Hill, III, Venable, Baetjer and Howard, L.L.P., Towson, Maryland; Jane Fugate Thorpe, Scott A. Elder, Alston & Bird, L.L.P., Atlanta, Georgia, for Cellco Partnership formerly d/b/a Bell Atlantic Mobile and Bell Atlantic Nynex Mobile d/b/a Verizon Wireless, Verizon Maryland, Inc. a/k/a Verizon Wireless, a/k/a Verizon, f/k/a Bell Atlantic-Maryland, Inc., Verizon Communications, Inc., f/k/a Bell Atlantic Corporation, Verizon Wireless, a/k/a Bell Atlantic Nynex, a/k/a Nynex, a/k/a Bell Atlantic Mobile, Inc. f/k/a Bell Atlantic Nynex Mobile, Inc. Thomas Watson, Curtis Renner, Watson & Renner, Washington, D.C., for Cingular Wireless, L.L.C. Michael Esher Yaggy, Jeffrey M. Yeatman, Piper Rudnick, L.L.P., Baltimore, Maryland, for Motorola, Inc. Steven M. Laduzinsky, Scott A. Hanfling, Kane, Laduzinsky & Mendoza, Ltd., Chicago, Illinois; Robert B. Green, Irwin, Green & Dexter, L.L.P., Towson, Maryland, for Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association. Michael H. O'Brien, Jason P. Sultzer, Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, White Plains, New York; Laura N. Steel, Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, Washington, D.C.; John B. Isbister, Harold M. Walter, Tydings & Rosenberg, L.L.P., Baltimore, Maryland, for Samsung Electronics America, Inc., a/k/a Samsung Electronics. Paul S. Schleifman, Shook, Hardy & Bacon, L.L.P., Washington, D.C.; J. Stan Sexton, Michael D. Moeller, Shook, Hardy & Bacon, L.L.P., Kansas City, Missouri, for Sprint PCS Limited Partnership, a/k/a Sprint Spectrum; Sprint Spectrum, L.L.C., d/b/a Sprint PCS. Charles P. Goodell, James A. Frederick, Goodell, Devries, Leech & Dann, Baltimore, Maryland, for North America, Inc. a/k/a Sanyo North America Group, Sanyo Corporation, Sanyo Business Systems Corporation. Steven M. Zager, Lance Lackey, Robert Pemberton, Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, L.L.P., Houston, Texas; Paul F. Walter, Tydings and Rosenberg, L.L.P., Baltimore, Maryland, for Nokia, Inc., a/k/a Nokia Mobile Phones, Inc., and Nokia Corporation. Ray M. Aragon, Raymond B. Biagini, McKenna, Long & Aldridge, L.L.P., Washington, D.C., for Electronics North America Corporation. Eugene A. Schoon, Tamar B. Kelber, Sidley, Austin, Brown & Wood, L.L.P., Chicago, Illinois, for Voicestream Wireless Corporation a/k/a Voicestream Wireless, Powertel, Inc., Powertel PCS, Inc., Powertel/Atlanta, Inc. Patrick R. Buckler, Walter T. Dudley, McGuirewoods, L.L.P., Baltimore, Maryland; Edward M. Crane, David L. Hanselman, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Chicago, Illinois, for Nextel Communications of the Mid-Atlantic, Inc., Nextel of New York, Inc., and Nextel South Corp. James P. Ulwick, Kramon & Graham, P.A., Baltimore, Maryland, for NEC America, Inc. Francis A. Citera, Greenberg & Traurig, P.C., Chicago, Illinois, for Electronics Inc., Qualcomm Incorporated. Russell J. Rogers, Lawrence A. Slovensky, McKenna, Long & Aldridge, L.L.P., Atlanta, Georgia, for Partners Operating Corp. and Nextel Partners, Inc. Paul D. Krause Laura N. Steel, Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edleman & Dicker, L.L.P., Washington, D.C., for Matsushita Corporation of America, a/k/a Panasonic Corporation, and Sanyo North America, Inc. a/k/a Sanyo North America Group; Sanyo Corporation; Sanyo Business Systems, Corporation. Paul Vishny, Paul Freehling, D'Ancona & Pflaum, L.L.C., Chicago, Illinois, for Telecommunications Industry Association. Mark H. Kolman, Leslie R. Cohen, Dickstein, Shapiro, Morin & Oshinsky, L.L.P., Washington, D.C., for Audiovox Communications Corp. Charles L. Perry, Andrews & Kurth, L.L.P., Dallas, Texas, for Cellular One Group. Matthew T. Covell, Kevin B. Getzendanner, Arnall, Golden & Gregory, L.L.P., Atlanta, Georgia, for Mitsubishi Wireless Communications, Inc. Daniel S. Reinhardt, Steven J. Hewitson, Troutman Sanders, L.L.P., Atlanta, Georgia, for Southern Telecom, Inc. Gregg L. Bernstein, Denis J. Charlesworth, Martin, Snyder & Bernstein, P.A., Baltimore, Maryland; Charles L. Babcock, David T. Moran, James M. McCown, Ryan C. Wirtz, Jackson Walker, L.L.P., Dallas, Texas, for Ericsson Inc. Maureen Ellen Murphy, Murphy & Murphy, L.L.C., Catonsville, Maryland, for Baltimore Business Communications, Inc.

Before LUTTIG and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and KISER, Senior United States District Judge for the Western District of Virginia, sitting by designation.

Reversed and remanded by published opinion. Judge MICHAEL wrote the opinion, in which Judge LUTTIG joined. Senior Judge KISER wrote a dissenting opinin.

OPINION

MICHAEL, Circuit Judge:

This multidistrict litigation includes five class actions brought initially in the state courts of Georgia, Louisiana, Maryland, New York, and Pennsylvania. The plaintiffs sue Nokia Inc. and other entities (collectively, "Nokia") involved in the manufacture and sale of wireless telephones. The plaintiffs claim that wireless telephones emit an unsafe level of radio frequency radiation and that Nokia has hidden this fact from consumers. Nokia removed the five cases to various federal courts, and the Judicial...

5 cases
Document | U.S. District Court — Southern District of West Virginia – 2016
Powell v. Huntington Nat'l Bank
"...citation omitted)). Express preemption occurs when "Congress expressly declares its intent to preempt state law." Pinney v. Nokia, Inc. , 402 F.3d 430, 453 (4th Cir. 2005). Field preemption takes place when "Congress ‘occupies the field’ regulating so pervasively that there is no room left ..."
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Maryland – 2020
Just Puppies, Inc. v. Frosh
"...Congress.’ ") (internal citations omitted); accord Johnson v. Am. Towers, LLC , 781 F.3d 693, 707 (4th Cir. 2015) ; Pinney v. Nokia, Inc. , 402 F.3d 430, 457 (4th Cir. 2005). To the extent that plaintiffs’ preemption claim proceeds on the theory that the Puppy-Mill Act obstructs the AWA's l..."
Document | D.C. Court of Appeals – 2009
Murray v. Motorola, Inc., No. 07-CV-1074.
"...section 332(c)(7) quoted above shows, the section is entitled "Preservation of local zoning authority." Relying on Pinney v. Nokia, 402 F.3d 430, 454-55 (4th Cir.2005), plaintiffs argue that this caption makes clear that section 332(c)(7)'s reference to "facilities" is a reference to cell-p..."
Document | Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court – 2022
Crawford v. Commonwealth
"...CTS Corporation v. Dynamics Corporation of America , 481 U.S. 69, 88-89, 107 S.Ct. 1637, 95 L.Ed.2d 67 (1987) ; Pinney v. Nokia, Inc. , 402 F.3d 430, 460-61 (4th Cir. 2005) ; Norfolk Southern Corp. v. Oberly , 822 F.2d 388, 399-400 (3d Cir. 1987) ; United States v. Merkt , 794 F.2d 950, 956..."
Document | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit – 2022
Old Dominion Elec. Coop. v. PJM Interconnection, LLC
"...area that any civil complaint raising th[e] select group of claims is necessarily federal in character.’ " See Pinney v. Nokia, Inc. , 402 F.3d 430, 449 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Taylor , 481 U.S. 58, 63-64, 107 S.Ct. 1542, 95 L.Ed.2d 55 (1987) ). Second, federal ques..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial
5 books and journal articles
Document | Business tort litigation – 2014
Subject Matter Jurisdiction in Antitrust and Business Tort Litigation
"...may be conferred when a state law claim necessarily implicates substantial and disputed federal issue); Pinney v. Nokia, Inc., 402 F.3d 430, 442 (4th Cir. 272 Business Torts and Unfair Competition Handbook federal statutes, federal administrative agency regulations, 15 and federal common la..."
Document | Chapter 2 Subject Matter and Personal Jurisdiction, Removal, and Other Prefiling Considerations
2.7 Removal Jurisdiction
"...U.S.C. § 1441(c).[524] Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust, 463 U.S. 1, 7-9 (1983); Pinney v. Nokia, Inc., 402 F.3d 430, 442 (4th Cir. 2005).[525] Pinney, 402 F.3d at 443.[526] Pinney, 402 F.3d at 442 (quoting Christianson v. Colt Indus. Operating Corp., 486 U...."
Document | Chapter 2 Subject Matter and Personal Jurisdiction, Removal, and Other Prefiling Considerations
2.7 Removal Jurisdiction
"...28 U.S.C. § 1441(c).[501] Franchise Tax Bd. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust, 463 U.S. 1, 7-9 (1983); Pinney v. Nokia, Inc., 402 F.3d 430, 442 (4th Cir. 2005).[502] Pinney, 402 F.3d at 443.[503] Pinney, 402 F.3d at 442 (quoting Christianson v. Colt Indus. Operating Corp., 486 U.S. 80..."
Document | Vol. 34 Núm. 2, March 2021 – 2021
INTERNET FEDERALISM.
"...v. Charter Advanced Servs., 140 S. Ct. 6, 7 (2019) (Thomas, J., concurring in the denial of certiorari); see also Pinney v. Nokia, Inc., 402 F.3d 430, 453-54 & n.4 (4th Cir. 2005). But see Minn. Pub. Utils. Comm'n v. FCC, 483 F.3d 570, 581 (8th Cir. 2007) (holding that the Commission's ..."
Document |
Table of Authorities
"...BJ's Wholesale Club, Inc., 591 F. Supp. 2d 822 (E.D. Va. 2008)................................................. 136 Pinney v. Nokia, Inc., 402 F.3d 430 (4th Cir. 2005)............................................................................... 137, 140 Pinpoint IT Servs., L.L.C. v. Atlas..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 books and journal articles
Document | Business tort litigation – 2014
Subject Matter Jurisdiction in Antitrust and Business Tort Litigation
"...may be conferred when a state law claim necessarily implicates substantial and disputed federal issue); Pinney v. Nokia, Inc., 402 F.3d 430, 442 (4th Cir. 272 Business Torts and Unfair Competition Handbook federal statutes, federal administrative agency regulations, 15 and federal common la..."
Document | Chapter 2 Subject Matter and Personal Jurisdiction, Removal, and Other Prefiling Considerations
2.7 Removal Jurisdiction
"...U.S.C. § 1441(c).[524] Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust, 463 U.S. 1, 7-9 (1983); Pinney v. Nokia, Inc., 402 F.3d 430, 442 (4th Cir. 2005).[525] Pinney, 402 F.3d at 443.[526] Pinney, 402 F.3d at 442 (quoting Christianson v. Colt Indus. Operating Corp., 486 U...."
Document | Chapter 2 Subject Matter and Personal Jurisdiction, Removal, and Other Prefiling Considerations
2.7 Removal Jurisdiction
"...28 U.S.C. § 1441(c).[501] Franchise Tax Bd. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust, 463 U.S. 1, 7-9 (1983); Pinney v. Nokia, Inc., 402 F.3d 430, 442 (4th Cir. 2005).[502] Pinney, 402 F.3d at 443.[503] Pinney, 402 F.3d at 442 (quoting Christianson v. Colt Indus. Operating Corp., 486 U.S. 80..."
Document | Vol. 34 Núm. 2, March 2021 – 2021
INTERNET FEDERALISM.
"...v. Charter Advanced Servs., 140 S. Ct. 6, 7 (2019) (Thomas, J., concurring in the denial of certiorari); see also Pinney v. Nokia, Inc., 402 F.3d 430, 453-54 & n.4 (4th Cir. 2005). But see Minn. Pub. Utils. Comm'n v. FCC, 483 F.3d 570, 581 (8th Cir. 2007) (holding that the Commission's ..."
Document |
Table of Authorities
"...BJ's Wholesale Club, Inc., 591 F. Supp. 2d 822 (E.D. Va. 2008)................................................. 136 Pinney v. Nokia, Inc., 402 F.3d 430 (4th Cir. 2005)............................................................................... 137, 140 Pinpoint IT Servs., L.L.C. v. Atlas..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
Document | U.S. District Court — Southern District of West Virginia – 2016
Powell v. Huntington Nat'l Bank
"...citation omitted)). Express preemption occurs when "Congress expressly declares its intent to preempt state law." Pinney v. Nokia, Inc. , 402 F.3d 430, 453 (4th Cir. 2005). Field preemption takes place when "Congress ‘occupies the field’ regulating so pervasively that there is no room left ..."
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Maryland – 2020
Just Puppies, Inc. v. Frosh
"...Congress.’ ") (internal citations omitted); accord Johnson v. Am. Towers, LLC , 781 F.3d 693, 707 (4th Cir. 2015) ; Pinney v. Nokia, Inc. , 402 F.3d 430, 457 (4th Cir. 2005). To the extent that plaintiffs’ preemption claim proceeds on the theory that the Puppy-Mill Act obstructs the AWA's l..."
Document | D.C. Court of Appeals – 2009
Murray v. Motorola, Inc., No. 07-CV-1074.
"...section 332(c)(7) quoted above shows, the section is entitled "Preservation of local zoning authority." Relying on Pinney v. Nokia, 402 F.3d 430, 454-55 (4th Cir.2005), plaintiffs argue that this caption makes clear that section 332(c)(7)'s reference to "facilities" is a reference to cell-p..."
Document | Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court – 2022
Crawford v. Commonwealth
"...CTS Corporation v. Dynamics Corporation of America , 481 U.S. 69, 88-89, 107 S.Ct. 1637, 95 L.Ed.2d 67 (1987) ; Pinney v. Nokia, Inc. , 402 F.3d 430, 460-61 (4th Cir. 2005) ; Norfolk Southern Corp. v. Oberly , 822 F.2d 388, 399-400 (3d Cir. 1987) ; United States v. Merkt , 794 F.2d 950, 956..."
Document | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit – 2022
Old Dominion Elec. Coop. v. PJM Interconnection, LLC
"...area that any civil complaint raising th[e] select group of claims is necessarily federal in character.’ " See Pinney v. Nokia, Inc. , 402 F.3d 430, 449 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Taylor , 481 U.S. 58, 63-64, 107 S.Ct. 1542, 95 L.Ed.2d 55 (1987) ). Second, federal ques..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex