Home
Menu
Call attorney Graham Syfert at 904-383-7448
Personal Injury Lawyer
Florida Statute 564 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
F.S. 564 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:
Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 564

The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XXXIV
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND TOBACCO
Chapter 564
WINE
View Entire Chapter
CHAPTER 564
CHAPTER 564
WINE
564.01 Definitions.
564.02 License fees; vendors; manufacturers and distributors.
564.025 Surtax on license fees.
564.03 Wines; sacramental and religious purposes.
564.045 Licensure as primary American source of supply.
564.05 Limitation of size of individual wine containers; penalty.
564.055 Cider containers.
564.06 Excise taxes on wines and beverages.
564.07 Wine lists furnished to vendors.
564.08 Wine tastings by distributors and vendors.
564.09 Restaurants; off-premises consumption of wine.
564.01 Definitions.
(1) “Wine” means all beverages made from fresh fruits, berries, or grapes, either by natural fermentation or by natural fermentation with brandy added, in the manner required by the laws and regulations of the United States, and includes all sparkling wines, champagnes, combination of the aforesaid beverages, sake, vermouths, and like products. Sugar, flavors, and coloring materials may be added to wine to make it conform to the consumer’s taste, except that the ultimate flavor or the color of the product may not be altered to imitate a beverage other than wine or to change the character of the wine.
(2) “Fortified wine” means all wines containing more than 17.259 percent of alcohol by volume.
History.s. 4, ch. 72-230; s. 10, ch. 86-269; s. 6, ch. 2017-137.
Note.Former s. 561.01(4),(5).
564.02 License fees; vendors; manufacturers and distributors.
(1) Each vendor authorized to sell brewed beverages containing malt, wines, and fortified wines shall pay an annual state license tax, as follows:
(a) Vendors operating places of business where beverages are sold only for consumption off the premises shall pay an amount equal to 50 percent of the amount of the license tax herein provided for vendors in the same county operating places of business where consumption on the premises is permitted.
(b) Vendors operating places of business where consumption on the premises is permitted in counties having a population of over 100,000, according to the latest population estimate prepared pursuant to s. 186.901, for such county, shall pay $280.
(c) Vendors operating places of business where consumption on the premises is permitted in counties having a population of over 75,000 and not over 100,000, according to the latest population estimate prepared pursuant to s. 186.901, for such county, shall pay $240.
(d) Vendors operating places of business where consumption on the premises is permitted in counties having a population of over 50,000 and less than 75,000, according to the latest population estimate prepared pursuant to s. 186.901, for such county, shall pay $200.
(e) Vendors operating places of business where consumption on the premises is permitted in counties having a population of over 25,000 and less than 50,000, according to the latest population estimate prepared pursuant to s. 186.901, for such county, shall pay $160.
(f) Vendors operating places of business where consumption on the premises is permitted in counties having a population of less than 25,000, according to the latest population estimate prepared pursuant to s. 186.901, for such county, shall pay $120.
(2) Each wine manufacturer authorized to do business under the Beverage Law shall pay an annual state license tax for each plant or branch he or she may operate, as follows:
(a) If engaged in the manufacturing or bottling of wines and of nothing else, he or she shall pay $1,000.
(b) If engaged in the manufacturing of wines and cordials and of nothing else, he or she shall pay $2,000.
(3)(a) Each distributor authorized to sell brewed beverages containing malt, wines, and fortified wines in counties where the sale of intoxicating liquors, wines, and beers is permitted shall pay for each and every such establishment or branch he or she may operate or conduct a state license tax of $1,250.
(b) A bona fide religious order, monastery, church, or religious body that has a tax-exempt status as provided by s. 212.08(7)(m) or (p) may be licensed as a distributor under this subsection if its sales and distribution are limited to wines sold solely for religious or sacramental purposes to holders of valid permits obtained under s. 564.03; and such religious order, monastery, church, or religious body shall pay a state license tax of $50 for each and every such distribution establishment to be operated by the licensee.
History.s. 4, ch. 72-230; s. 1, ch. 79-305; s. 4, ch. 83-79; s. 2, ch. 85-204; s. 11, ch. 86-269; s. 30, ch. 87-6; s. 8, ch. 92-176; s. 874, ch. 97-103; s. 9, ch. 2000-228.
Note.Former ss. 561.34, 561.35.
564.025 Surtax on license fees.Each vendor of beverages containing alcohol of 0.5 percent or more by volume and not more than 14 percent by weight and of wines regardless of alcoholic content shall pay an annual surtax in an amount equal to 40 percent of the license fee imposed by s. 564.02(1).
History.s. 25, ch. 86-269.
564.03 Wines; sacramental and religious purposes.
(1) For the purpose of this section the term “wine” is hereby defined to mean wine, vinous spirits, or vinous liquors.
(2) Any religious order, monastery, church or religious body, or any minister, pastor, priest, or rabbi thereof, may purchase wine for religious or sacramental purposes from any duly licensed wholesaler or retailer within the state, by obtaining a permit from the division for such purchases herein provided.
(3) The division shall issue said permit upon sworn application, stating the name of the applicant, the religious purpose for which the wine is to be used, the amount to be purchased, and from whom the purchase is to be made.
(4) The division for good cause may refuse to issue said permit.
(5) Said wine and the sale thereof, when sold as herein provided and used for religious or sacramental purposes, shall be exempt from all other restrictions, regulations, and taxation now provided by the laws of the state for the sale and distribution of wine.
History.ss. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, ch. 20978, 1941; s. 7, ch. 29964, 1955; ss. 16, 35, ch. 69-106; s. 4, ch. 72-230; s. 29, ch. 79-11.
Note.Former s. 562.49.
564.045 Licensure as primary American source of supply.
(1) DEFINITION.“Primary American source of supply” means the manufacturer, vintner, winery, or bottler, or their legally authorized exclusive agent, who, if the product cannot be secured directly from the manufacturer by an American distributor, is the source closest to the manufacturer in the channel of commerce from whom the product can be secured by an American distributor, or who, if the product can be secured directly from the manufacturer by an American distributor, is the manufacturer. It shall also include any applicant who directly purchases vinous beverages from a manufacturer, vintner, winery, or bottler who represents that there is no primary American source of supply for the brand and such applicant must petition the division for approval of licensure.
(2) TAX CONTROL LICENSURE REQUIRED.For purposes of tax revenue control, no person, firm, corporation, or other entity which is the primary American source of supply as defined herein may sell, offer for sale, accept orders for sale, ship, or cause to be shipped into this state any vinous beverages to any distributor or importer within the state without having first obtained licensure as a primary American source of supply on forms provided by, and in such manner as prescribed by, the division. Applicants for licensure as a primary American source of supply shall be exempt from the requirements and qualification standards set forth in ss. 561.15 and 561.17.
(3) LICENSE FEES.Licensure as a primary American source of supply authorizes the shipment of vinous beverages manufactured within and without the state to licensed distributors, importers, manufacturers, bonded warehouses, and registered exporters within the state. The annual license fee for a primary American source of supply is $15 for each brand that requires a federal label approval and is scheduled for shipment to a licensed distributor or importer within this state for the purpose of being sold within the state. The annual license fee shall be submitted with the application for initial licensure. This license shall be renewed each year and the renewal fee shall be $15 for each brand shipped into the state during the preceding year.
(4) CERTAIN INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN SHIPMENTS PROHIBITED.No holder of a distributor’s license or importer’s license as classified by s. 561.14(2) may ship or cause to be shipped into this state, or accept delivery from another state or a foreign country of, any vinous beverages except directly from a licensed primary American source of supply.
(5) PRIVATE LABELS.Nothing herein shall prohibit the ownership by vendors of brand names of distilled spirits and vinous beverages commonly known as private labels; provided that such ownership and use thereof do not otherwise violate the Beverage Law.
(6) RULEMAKING AUTHORITY.The division shall promulgate rules as necessary to carry out the purpose of this section.
History.ss. 1, 3, ch. 78-135; s. 1, ch. 85-58; s. 10, ch. 96-419.
564.05 Limitation of size of individual wine containers; penalty.It is unlawful for a person to sell within this state wine in an individual container holding more than 1 gallon of such wine, unless such wine is in a reusable container holding 5.16 gallons. However, qualified distributors and manufacturers may sell wine to other qualified distributors or manufacturers in any size container. Except as provided in s. 564.09, wine sold or offered for sale by a licensed vendor to be consumed off the premises shall be in the unopened original container. A person convicted of a violation of this section commits a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
History.ss. 1, 2, ch. 19498, 1939; CGL 1940 Supp. 7648(33); s. 7, ch. 22858, 1945; s. 580, ch. 71-136; s. 4, ch. 72-230; s. 1, ch. 2013-199.
Note.Former s. 569.06.
564.055 Cider containers.Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, cider, as defined in s. 564.06(4), may be sold by vendors at retail in any size individual container containing no more than 32 ounces of cider; however, this section does not prohibit cider from being packaged and sold in bulk, in kegs or barrels, or in any individual container that contains 1 gallon or more of cider, regardless of container type.
History.s. 2, ch. 2001-78.
564.06 Excise taxes on wines and beverages.
(1) As to beverages including wines, except natural sparkling wines, cider and malt beverages, containing 0.5 percent or more alcohol by volume and less than 17.259 percent alcohol by volume, there shall be paid by all manufacturers and distributors a tax at the rate of $2.25 per gallon.
(2) As to all wines, except natural sparkling wines, containing 17.259 percent or more alcohol by volume, there shall be paid by manufacturers and distributors a tax at the rate of $3.00 per gallon.
(3) As to natural sparkling wines, there shall be paid by all manufacturers and distributors a tax at the rate of $3.50 per gallon.
(4) As to cider, which is made from the normal alcoholic fermentation of the juice of sound, ripe apples or pears, including but not limited to flavored, sparkling, or carbonated cider and cider made from condensed apple or pear must, that contain not less than one-half of 1 percent of alcohol by volume and not more than 7 percent of alcohol by volume, there shall be paid by all manufacturers and distributors a tax at the rate of $.89 per gallon. With the sole exception of the excise tax rate, cider shall be considered wine and shall be subject to the provisions of this chapter.
(5)(a) As to wine coolers, which are a combination of wines containing 0.5 percent or more alcohol by volume, carbonated water, and flavors or fruit juices and preservatives and which contain 1 to 6 percent alcohol content by volume, there shall be paid by all manufacturers and distributors a tax at the rate of $2.25 per gallon.
(b) All products however derived, distilled, mixed, or fermented and which contain less than 6 percent alcohol by volume which are taxed under this chapter shall be available for purchase and sale as provided in ss. 563.02 and 564.02 by any licensee holding a valid license to sell alcoholic beverages for consumption either on or off premises, and nothing contained in chapter 562, chapter 563, chapter 565, or this chapter shall be construed to prevent such sales.
(6) Wine used by any established church as sacramental wine or in connection with religious services is hereby expressly exempted from the provisions of this section.
(7) Every distributor selling wine within the state shall pay the tax to the division monthly on or before the 10th day of the following month, less 1.9 percent of the tax due, which shall be withheld by the distributor for keeping prescribed records, furnishing bond, and properly accounting for and remitting taxes due to the state. However, no allowance shall be granted or permitted when the tax is delinquent at the time of payment.
(8) The excise taxes required to be paid by this section are not required to be paid upon any alcoholic beverage sold to a post exchange, ship service store, or base exchange located in a military, naval, or air force reservation within this state.
(9) The department is authorized to adopt rules to effectuate the provisions of this section.
(10) Fifty percent of all revenues collected from the excise taxes imposed by this section on wine produced by manufacturers in this state from products grown in the state must be deposited into the Viticulture Trust Fund established pursuant to s. 599.012.
History.s. 4, ch. 72-230; s. 2, ch. 77-407; ss. 1, 2, ch. 79-304; s. 414, ch. 81-259; s. 14, ch. 83-349; s. 8, ch. 84-262; s. 1, ch. 85-204; s. 13, ch. 86-269; s. 2, ch. 87-226; ss. 10, 18, ch. 88-308; s. 6, ch. 90-233; s. 3, ch. 91-60; s. 2, ch. 94-296; s. 7, ch. 96-419; s. 127, ch. 2013-18; s. 21, ch. 2016-220.
Note.Former s. 561.46.
564.07 Wine lists furnished to vendors.A distributor of vinous beverages in this state may furnish, give, rent, loan, or sell to a vendor, and a vendor may accept, alcoholic beverage lists, commonly referred to as “wine lists,” without the same being a violation of s. 561.42(1).
History.s. 1, ch. 81-159.
564.08 Wine tastings by distributors and vendors.A licensed distributor of vinous beverages, or any vendor, is authorized to conduct wine tastings upon any licensed premises authorized to sell vinous or spirituous beverages by package or for consumption on premises without being in violation of s. 561.42, provided that the conduct of the wine tasting shall be limited to and directed toward the general public of the age of legal consumption.
History.s. 1, ch. 81-160.
564.09 Restaurants; off-premises consumption of wine.Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a restaurant licensed to sell wine on the premises may permit a patron to remove one unsealed bottle of wine for consumption off the premises if the patron has purchased a meal and consumed a portion of the bottle of wine on the restaurant premises. A partially consumed bottle of wine that is to be removed from the premises must be securely resealed by the licensee or its employees before removal from the premises. The partially consumed bottle of wine shall be placed in a bag or other container that is secured in such a manner that it is visibly apparent if the container has been subsequently opened or tampered with, and a dated receipt for the bottle of wine and meal shall be provided by the licensee and attached to the container. If transported in a motor vehicle, the container with the resealed bottle of wine must be placed in a locked glove compartment, a locked trunk, or the area behind the last upright seat of a motor vehicle that is not equipped with a trunk.
History.s. 1, ch. 2005-250; s. 2, ch. 2021-30.

F.S. 564 on Google Scholar

F.S. 564 on Casetext

Amendments to 564


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 564
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

S400.564 - PUBLIC ORDER CRIMES - RENUMBERED. SEE REC # 8423 - M: S
S564.05 - LIQUOR-MFG - UNLAWFUL SIZE INDIVIDUAL WINE CONTAINER - M: S
S817.564 3 - DRUGS-HEALTH OR SAFETY - MANUFACTURE DISTRIB SELL ETC IMITATION DRUGS - F: T
S817.564 4 - CONTRIB DELINQ MINOR - OVER 18 SELL ETC IMITATION DRUG TO UND 18 YOA - F: T
S817.564 5 - DRUGS-HEALTH OR SAFETY - ADVERTISE SOLICIT DISTRIBUTE IMITATION DRUGS - M: F



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

ESPINOZA, v. MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,, 140 S. Ct. 2246 (U.S. 2020)

. . . IMS Health Inc. , 564 U.S. 552, 578-579, 131 S.Ct. 2653, 180 L.Ed.2d 544 (2011). . . .

JUNE MEDICAL SERVICES L. L. C. v. RUSSO, v. LLC., 140 S. Ct. 2103 (U.S. 2020)

. . . L.Ed.2d 665 (2016) (THOMAS, J., dissenting) (slip op., at 2-5); Kowalski , 543 U.S. at 135, 125 S.Ct. 564 . . . their potential clients due to the lack of a current close relationship, id., at 130-131, 125 S.Ct. 564 . . . Tesmer , 543 U.S. 125, 135, 125 S.Ct. 564, 160 L.Ed.2d 519 (2004) (THOMAS, J., concurring) (citing Clark . . . Kowalski , supra, at 130, 125 S.Ct. 564 (quoting Powers v. . . . Tesmer , 543 U.S. 125, 129-130, 125 S.Ct. 564, 160 L.Ed.2d 519 (2004) ; see also Powers v. . . . See Kowalski , 543 U.S. at 130, 125 S.Ct. 564. The plurality opinion in Singleton v. . . . See Kowalski , 543 U.S. at 130, 125 S.Ct. 564. . . . Tesmer , 543 U.S. 125, 129, 125 S.Ct. 564, 160 L.Ed.2d 519 (2004) (quoting Warth v. . . . This rule is "prudential." 543 U.S. at 128-129, 125 S.Ct. 564. . . . Id., at 129, 125 S.Ct. 564 ; see Craig v. . . . Bessemer City , 470 U.S. 564, 573, 105 S.Ct. 1504, 84 L.Ed.2d 518 (1985) (quoting Zenith Radio Corp. . . . Bennett , 564 U.S. 721, 748, 131 S.Ct. 2806, 180 L.Ed.2d 664 (2011) (asking whether a law "imposes a . . .

SEILA LAW LLC, v. CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU, 140 S. Ct. 2183 (U.S. 2020)

. . . United States , 564 U.S. 211, 217, 131 S.Ct. 2355, 180 L.Ed.2d 269 (2011) (When the plaintiff has standing . . . P. , 564 U.S. 91, 106, 131 S.Ct. 2238, 180 L.Ed.2d 131 (2011) ("The canon against superfluity assists . . . Marshall , 564 U.S. 462, 484, 131 S.Ct. 2594, 180 L.Ed.2d 475 (2011). . . .

C. LIU, v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, 140 S. Ct. 1936 (U.S. 2020)

. . . an accounting from and disgorgement by public officers and those in collusion with them," id. , at 564 . . .

ROGERS, v. GREWAL,, 140 S. Ct. 1865 (U.S. 2020)

. . . In re Preis , 118 N.J. 564, 571, 573 A.2d 148, 152 (1990). . . .

FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, v. AURELIUS INVESTMENT, LLC, LLC, III v. LLC, v. LLC, n De De La El Y v., 140 S. Ct. 1649 (U.S. 2020)

. . . ." § 201(b), id. , at 564; see §§ 201-207, id. , at 563-575. . . . provides "a method to achieve fiscal responsibility and access to the capital markets." § 201(b), id. , at 564 . . .

VALENTINE, v. COLLIER,, 140 S. Ct. 1598 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Bessemer City , 470 U.S. 564, 573, 105 S.Ct. 1504, 84 L.Ed.2d 518 (1985). . . .

COUNTY OF MAUI, HAWAII, v. HAWAII WILDLIFE FUND,, 140 S. Ct. 1462 (U.S. 2020)

. . . McBride , 564 U.S. 685, 701, 131 S.Ct. 2630, 180 L.Ed.2d 637 (2011) (plurality opinion). . . .

THRYV, INC. v. CLICK- TO- CALL TECHNOLOGIES, LP,, 140 S. Ct. 1367 (U.S. 2020)

. . . P. , 564 U.S. 91, 131 S.Ct. 2238, 180 L.Ed.2d 131 (2011). . . . Marshall , 564 U.S. 462, 513, 131 S.Ct. 2594, 180 L.Ed.2d 475 (2011) (Breyer, J., dissenting). . . .

RAMOS, v. LOUISIANA, 140 S. Ct. 1390 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Nicastro , 564 U.S. 873, 131 S.Ct. 2780, 180 L.Ed.2d 765 (2011) ; McDonald v. . . .

KANSAS, v. GARCIA v. v., 140 S. Ct. 791 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Mensing , 564 U.S. 604, 617-618, 131 S.Ct. 2567, 180 L.Ed.2d 580 (2011). . . . Mensing , 564 U.S. 604, 622, 131 S.Ct. 2567, 180 L.Ed.2d 580 (2011) (plurality opinion). . . . Town of Harrison , 520 U.S. 564, 617, 117 S.Ct. 1590, 137 L.Ed.2d 852 (1997) (THOMAS, J., dissenting) . . .

HOLGUIN- HERNANDEZ, v. UNITED STATES, 140 S. Ct. 762 (U.S. 2020)

. . . United States , 564 U.S. 319, 335, 131 S.Ct. 2382, 180 L.Ed.2d 357 (2011) ; Cutter v. . . .

INTEL CORPORATION INVESTMENT POLICY COMMITTEE, v. M. SULYMA, 140 S. Ct. 768 (U.S. 2020)

. . . Owens Corning Investment Review Comm. , 622 F.3d 564, 571 (CA6 2010) ("Actual knowledge does not require . . .

MICHIGAN, v. BECK., 140 S. Ct. 1243 (U.S. 2020)

. . . No. 19-564 Supreme Court of the United States. . . .

NATIONAL REVIEW, INC. v. E. MANN v. E., 140 S. Ct. 344 (U.S. 2019)

. . . Travelers Cos. , 668 F.3d 559, 564 (C.A.8 2012) ; see also, e.g. , Madison v. . . .

M. LIPSCHULTZ, v. CHARTER ADVANCED SERVICES MN LLC,, 140 S. Ct. 6 (U.S. 2019)

. . . Mensing , 564 U.S. 604, 621, 131 S.Ct. 2567, 180 L.Ed.2d 580 (2011) ; see also Nelson, Preemption, 86 . . .

ELHADY, v. H. KABLE,, 391 F. Supp. 3d 562 (E.D. Va. 2019)

. . . Roth , 408 U.S. 564, 573, 92 S.Ct. 2701, 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972). . . .

ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 935 F.3d 858 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Tesmer , 543 U.S. 125, 128, 125 S.Ct. 564, 160 L.Ed.2d 519 (2004), and in this case, we answer yes. . . .

UNITED STATES v. TAYLOR, v., 935 F.3d 1279 (11th Cir. 2019)

. . . United States , 564 U.S. 229, 236-37, 131 S.Ct. 2419, 180 L.Ed.2d 285 (2011). . . . Davis , 564 U.S. at 238, 131 S.Ct. 2419. . . . relied on a warrant, Leon , 468 U.S. at 922, 104 S.Ct. 3405, or on binding judicial precedent, Davis , 564 . . . Davis , 564 U.S. at 237, 131 S.Ct. 2419 ("[Exclusion] almost always requires courts to ignore reliable . . . Davis , 564 U.S. at 238, 131 S.Ct. 2419. . . . United States , 564 U.S. 229, 236-37, 238, 131 S.Ct. 2419, 180 L.Ed.2d 285 (2011) (citation omitted). . . . meaningfu[l]' deterrence, and culpable enough to be 'worth the price paid by the justice system.' " Davis , 564 . . . , 480 U.S. at 352-53, 107 S.Ct. 1160, and on a judicial decision that was later overruled, Davis , 564 . . . Davis , 564 U.S. at 240, 131 S.Ct. 2419 ; see also Herring , 555 U.S. at 144, 129 S.Ct. 695 ; Krull , . . . Compare, e.g. , Davis , 564 U.S. at 238, 131 S.Ct. 2419 ("The Court has over time applied this 'good-faith . . .

EDMO, v. CORIZON, INC. Al v. Al, 935 F.3d 757 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Gagnon , 626 F.3d 557, 564 (11th Cir. 2010) ("Judicial decisions addressing deliberate indifference to . . .

BELLITTO, v. SNIPES,, 935 F.3d 1192 (11th Cir. 2019)

. . . City of Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564, 573, 105 S.Ct. 1504, 84 L.Ed.2d 518 (1985) ). . . . Partnership, 564 U.S. 91, 106, 131 S.Ct. 2238, 180 L.Ed.2d 131 (2011). . . .

IN RE JUAREZ, v., 603 B.R. 610 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2019)

. . . City of Bessemer City , 470 U.S. 564, 573-74, 105 S.Ct. 1504, 84 L.Ed.2d 518 (1985). DISCUSSION A. . . .

CHAMBERLAIN GROUP, INC. v. TECHTRONIC INDUSTRIES CO. OWT ET Co., 935 F.3d 1341 (Fed. Cir. 2019)

. . . P'ship , 564 U.S. 91, 111, 131 S.Ct. 2238, 180 L.Ed.2d 131 (2011) ("When warranted, the jury may be instructed . . .

HARRIS, v. K. HARRIS,, 935 F.3d 670 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Oceanic Contractors, Inc. , 458 U.S. 564, 570, 102 S.Ct. 3245, 73 L.Ed.2d 973 (1982) (internal quotation . . .

COMPERE, v. NUSRET MIAMI, LLC, d b a a, 391 F. Supp. 3d 1197 (S.D. Fla. 2019)

. . . Funding, Inc. , 564 F. Supp. 2d 1330, 1336 (M.D. . . .

J. MURRAY, M. D. a v. MAYO CLINIC, a M. D. M. D. M. D. M. D. M. D. M. D. M. D. a, 934 F.3d 1101 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Co. , 362 F.3d 564, 568 (9th Cir. 2004) ; Snead v. Metro. Prop. & Cas. Ins. . . .

UNITED STATES v. V. GILLIAM,, 934 F.3d 854 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . DeMarce , 564 F.3d 989, 995 (8th Cir. 2009). . . . See DeMarce , 564 F.3d at 997. . . .

COLE v. CARSON, v., 935 F.3d 444 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . See also Colston, 130 F.3d at 100 ; Ontiveros , 564 F.3d at 385 (holding no constitutional violation . . . City of Rosenberg, 564 F.3d 379, 384 (5th Cir. 2009). . . .

BACA v. COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF STATE, G. T. L. M., 935 F.3d 887 (10th Cir. 2019)

. . . Wise , 522 F.3d 564, 566 (5th Cir. 2008) ("The Supreme Court has held that state officials lack standing . . . United States , 564 U.S. 229, 249 n.10, 131 S.Ct. 2419, 180 L.Ed.2d 285 (2011) )). . . .

BURKE, v. REGALADO, v., 935 F.3d 960 (10th Cir. 2019)

. . . Jicarilla Apache Nation , 564 U.S. 162, 169, 131 S.Ct. 2313, 180 L.Ed.2d 187 (2011) ; see also In re . . .

UNITED STATES v. BEGAY,, 934 F.3d 1033 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Oceanic Contractors, Inc. , 458 U.S. 564, 575, 102 S.Ct. 3245, 73 L.Ed.2d 973 (1982) (noting "that interpretations . . .

UNITED STATES v. CANO,, 934 F.3d 1002 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . United States , 564 U.S. 229, 236, 131 S.Ct. 2419, 180 L.Ed.2d 285 (2011) (quoting Stone v. . . . Lara , 815 F.3d 605, 613 (9th Cir. 2016) (quoting Davis , 564 U.S. at 232, 131 S.Ct. 2419 ). . . .

SENNE v. KANSAS CITY ROYALS BASEBALL CORP. LLC LLC LP St. LLC LLC LLC LLC L. P. L. P. LLC LLC L. P. AZPB L. P. P LLC LLC LP LLP LLC LLC,, 934 F.3d 918 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Dukes , 564 U.S. 338, 352, 131 S.Ct. 2541, 180 L.Ed.2d 374 (2011), contend that the district court was . . . Rptr. 564, 568 (1980) ("It is true that the place of the wrong is no longer treated as a controlling . . .

AMAZON. COM, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,, 934 F.3d 976 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Co. , 564 U.S. 50, 68, 131 S.Ct. 2254, 180 L.Ed.2d 96 (2011) (alteration in original) (Scalia, J., concurring . . .

BOXILL, v. P. O GRADY E. E. T., 935 F.3d 510 (6th Cir. 2019)

. . . Sch. , 655 F.3d 556, 564 (6th Cir. 2011) ("This Court has consistently held that damage claims against . . .

NALPROPION PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. ACTAVIS LABORATORIES FL, INC., 934 F.3d 1344 (Fed. Cir. 2019)

. . . City of Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564, 574, 105 S.Ct. 1504, 84 L.Ed.2d 518 (1985) (citing United States . . .

FORREST, v. UNITED STATES, 934 F.3d 775 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . United States, 915 F.3d 564, 567 (8th Cir. 2019) (quoting Walker v. . . .

UNITED STATES v. G. WAGUESPACK,, 935 F.3d 322 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . New Mexico , 564 U.S. 647, 131 S.Ct. 2705, 180 L.Ed.2d 610 (2011), to support his argument that his rights . . . foundation) raw data generated by a machine in conjunction with the testimony of an expert witness. 564 . . .

DEJORIA, v. MAGHREB PETROLEUM EXPLORATION, S. A., 935 F.3d 381 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . KPMG , 455 F.3d 564 (5th Cir. 2006). . . . City of Bessemer City , 470 U.S. 564, 575, 105 S.Ct. 1504, 84 L.Ed.2d 518 (1985) -is not present because . . .

ZEHENTBAUER FAMILY LAND, LP LP v. CHESAPEAKE EXPLORATION, L. L. C. L. L. C. E P USA,, 935 F.3d 496 (6th Cir. 2019)

. . . Dukes , 564 U.S. 338, 348, 131 S.Ct. 2541, 180 L.Ed.2d 374 (2011) (quoting Califano v. . . . Wal-Mart , 564 U.S. at 350, 131 S.Ct. 2541 (ellipsis and emphasis in original) (quoting Richard A. . . . the merits of the plaintiff's underlying claim.' " Id. at 33-34, 133 S.Ct. 1426 (quoting Wal-Mart , 564 . . . issues comprising the plaintiff's cause of action.' " Id. at 34, 133 S.Ct. 1426 (quoting Wal-Mart , 564 . . .

UNITED STATES v. CLARK,, 935 F.3d 558 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Curlin , 638 F.3d 562, 564 (7th Cir. 2011). . . .

SANOFI- AVENTIS U. S. LLC, IP, v. DR. REDDY S LABORATORIES, INC. Dr. s USA, LLC, LLC, LLC,, 933 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2019)

. . . P'ship , 564 U.S. 91, 95, 131 S.Ct. 2238, 180 L.Ed.2d 131 (2011) ; Ferring B.V. v. . . .

LILLY, v. CITY OF NEW YORK NYPD No. NYPD No., 934 F.3d 222 (2nd Cir. 2019)

. . . Id. at 564-65, 106 S.Ct. 3088 (internal quotation marks omitted) (citing Blum , 465 U.S. at 898-900, . . . Blum, 465 U.S. at 898, 104 S.Ct. 1541 ; see also Delaware Valley, 478 U.S. at 564-65, 106 S.Ct. 3088. . . . See Blum, 465 U.S. at 898-99, 900, 104 S.Ct. 1541 ; see also Delaware Valley, 478 U.S. at 564-65, 566 . . .

UNITED STATES v. W. HARNEY,, 934 F.3d 502 (6th Cir. 2019)

. . . United States , 564 U.S. 229, 236, 131 S.Ct. 2419, 180 L.Ed.2d 285 (2011), courts will not exclude evidence . . .

ESTATE OF ROMAIN, v. CITY OF GROSSE POINTE FARMS A. J., 935 F.3d 485 (6th Cir. 2019)

. . . Olech , 528 U.S. 562, 564, 120 S.Ct. 1073, 145 L.Ed.2d 1060 (2000) (per curiam), some commentators have . . .

UNITED STATES v. HERNANDEZ- MARTINEZ, v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v., 933 F.3d 1126 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . United States , 564 U.S. 522, 131 S.Ct. 2685, 180 L.Ed.2d 519 (2011) : Is a defendant who enters into . . . See Freeman , 564 U.S. at 535-36, 131 S.Ct. 2685 (Sotomayor, J., concurring); Hughes , 138 S. . . . See Freeman , 564 U.S. at 526, 131 S.Ct. 2685 ; Hughes , 138 S. Ct. at 1771. . . .

ADAM AND EVE JONESBORO, LLC, v. PERRIN, In, 933 F.3d 951 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . Entm't Merchants Ass'n , 564 U.S. 786, 790, 131 S.Ct. 2729, 180 L.Ed.2d 708 (2011). . . .

N. S. v. KANSAS CITY BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS, 933 F.3d 967 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . City of Bella Villa , 557 F.3d 564, 575 (8th Cir. 2009) (noting that neither "innuendo regarding [a defendant's . . .

UNITED STATES v. IN U. S. CURRENCY, 933 F.3d 971 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . Currency , 744 F.3d 559, 564 (8th Cir. 2014), overruled on other grounds by $579,475.00 , 917 F.3d at . . .

MARTIN, v. MARINEZ,, 934 F.3d 594 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . McBride , 564 U.S. 685, 691, 131 S.Ct. 2630, 180 L.Ed.2d 637 (2011) ("The term 'proximate cause' is shorthand . . .

UNITED STATES v. JOBE,, 933 F.3d 1074 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . United States , 564 U.S. 229, 237, 131 S.Ct. 2419, 180 L.Ed.2d 285 (2011) (quotation marks and citation . . .

IN RE FIFTH AVENUE AND RELATED PROPERTIES, 934 F.3d 147 (2nd Cir. 2019)

. . . United States , 564 U.S. 229, 238, 131 S.Ct. 2419, 180 L.Ed.2d 285 (2011) (citation, brackets, and quotation . . . Davis , 564 U.S. at 239, 131 S.Ct. 2419 (quoting Leon , 468 U.S. at 916, 104 S.Ct. 3405 ) (brackets omitted . . . See Davis , 564 U.S. at 238, 131 S.Ct. 2419 (quotation marks omitted). . . .

REYES, v. FISCHER, J. X., 934 F.3d 97 (2nd Cir. 2019)

. . . Coughlin, 905 F.2d 564, 568 (2d Cir. 1990) ("It is clear that where there has been a denial of due process . . .

MOGARD, v. CITY OF MILBANK,, 932 F.3d 1184 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . Roth , 408 U.S. 564, 577, 92 S.Ct. 2701, 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972). . . .

BAKALIAN v. CENTRAL BANK OF REPUBLIC OF TURKEY T. C. v. T. C. v. T. C. v. T. C., 932 F.3d 1229 (9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Philippine Nat'l Bank , 976 F.2d 561, 564 (9th Cir. 1992). . . . Halifax PLC , 564 F.3d 1177, 1184 (9th Cir. 2009). . . .

AMERICAN BANKERS ASSOCIATION, N. A. v. UNITED STATES,, 932 F.3d 1375 (Fed. Cir. 2019)

. . . Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 577, 92 S.Ct. 2701, 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972) ). . . .

PARENT PROFESSIONAL ADVOCACY LEAGUE M. W. a F. D. S. S. a S. Y. v. CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, MASSACHUSETTS J., 934 F.3d 13 (1st Cir. 2019)

. . . Dukes, 564 U.S. 338, 350, 131 S.Ct. 2541, 180 L.Ed.2d 374 (2011). . . . Wal-Mart, 564 U.S. at 350, 131 S.Ct. 2541. . . . Wal-Mart, 564 U.S. at 356, 131 S.Ct. 2541. . . . Wal-Mart, 564 U.S. at 356, 131 S.Ct. 2541. . . . Wal-Mart, 564 U.S. at 358, 131 S.Ct. 2541. Such an inference might satisfy commonality. Id. . . .

UNITED STATES v. L. HARPER,, 934 F.3d 524 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . United States , 397 F.3d 564, 568-69 (7th Cir. 2005). . . .

WINDRIDGE OF NAPERVILLE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, v. PHILADELPHIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY,, 932 F.3d 1035 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Hartford Insurance Co. of the Midwest , 214 Ill.2d 11, 291 Ill.Dec. 269, 823 N.E.2d 561, 564 (2005) ( . . .

UNITED STATES v. JOHNSON,, 932 F.3d 965 (6th Cir. 2019)

. . . United States , 564 U.S. 211, 225, 131 S.Ct. 2355, 180 L.Ed.2d 269 (2011). . . .

T. SCHMITT v. LAROSE,, 933 F.3d 628 (6th Cir. 2019)

. . . Bloomberg , 564 F.3d 587 (2d Cir. 2009) (holding referendum statutes are only subject to rational-basis . . . See id. at 1101, 1103 ; see also Molinari , 564 F.3d at 600-01 ("[P]laintiffs here claim that their First . . .

WOZNIAK, v. ADESIDA,, 932 F.3d 1008 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . Roth , 408 U.S. 564, 92 S.Ct. 2701, 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972), with Perry v. . . .

UNITED STATES v. BOTELLO- ZEPEDA,, 933 F.3d 452 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . United States , 564 U.S. 319, 335, 131 S.Ct. 2382, 180 L.Ed.2d 357 (2011), in increasing the sentence . . . Tapia , 564 U.S. at 321, 131 S.Ct. 2382. . . .

MORALES- MORALES, v. P. BARR, U. S., 933 F.3d 456 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . City of Bessemer City , 470 U.S. 564, 574, 105 S.Ct. 1504, 84 L.Ed.2d 518 (1985). . . .

IN RE GOOGLE INC. COOKIE PLACEMENT CONSUMER PRIVACY LITIGATION H., 934 F.3d 316 (3rd Cir. 2019)

. . . Dukes , 564 U.S. 338, 363, 131 S.Ct. 2541, 180 L.Ed.2d 374 (2011). . . . Football League Players Concussion Injury Litig. , 821 F.3d 410, 435 (3d Cir. 2016) ; see also Dukes , 564 . . . Dukes , 564 U.S. at 361-63, 131 S.Ct. 2541. . . . See Dukes , 564 U.S. at 362, 131 S.Ct. 2541. . . . Dukes , 564 U.S. at 360, 131 S.Ct. 2541. . . .

MCDONOUGH A. v. CYCLING SPORTS GROUP, INC. Co., 392 F. Supp. 3d 320 (W.D.N.Y. 2019)

. . . Nicastro , 564 U.S. 873, 131 S.Ct. 2780, 180 L.Ed.2d 765 (2011), governs this matter and demonstrates . . .

KODIAK OIL GAS USA INC. HRC LLC v. BURR S. EOG S., 932 F.3d 1125 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . Id. at 564, 101 S.Ct. 1245. . . . congressional delegation.' " Id. at 359, 121 S.Ct. 2304 (emphasis omitted) (quoting Montana , 450 U.S. at 564 . . . emphasis omitted); see also Plains Commerce Bank , 554 U.S. at 332, 128 S.Ct. 2709 ; Montana , 450 U.S. at 564 . . .

O. CAMPOS, v. COOK COUNTY,, 932 F.3d 972 (7th Cir. 2019)

. . . City of Chicago , 552 F.3d 564, 566 (7th Cir. 2009). . . .

UNITED STATES v. ELDRED, 933 F.3d 110 (2nd Cir. 2019)

. . . United States , 564 U.S. 229, 238, 131 S.Ct. 2419, 180 L.Ed.2d 285 (2011) (noting that exclusion is not . . . Davis , 564 U.S. at 238, 131 S.Ct. 2419 (internal quotation marks omitted). . . . , cannot logically contribute to the deterrence of Fourth Amendment violations."); see also Davis , 564 . . .

UNITED STATES v. D. RIVERA- CARRASQUILLO, a k a KX, a k a a k a a k a n V a k a, 933 F.3d 33 (1st Cir. 2019)

. . . City of Bessemer, 470 U.S. 564, 575, 105 S.Ct. 1504, 84 L.Ed.2d 518 (1985) (emphasis added). . . . Bowersox, 157 F.3d 560, 564 n.4 (8th Cir. 1998) ), we assume without deciding that errors occurred. . . .

UNITED STATES v. ESCALANTE,, 933 F.3d 395 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . Delgado-Martinez , 564 F.3d 750, 753 (5th Cir. 2009) ). . . .

STEWARD HOLY FAMILY HOSPITAL, INC. v. MASSACHUSETTS NURSES ASSOCIATION,, 932 F.3d 14 (1st Cir. 2019)

. . . Sutter, 569 U.S. 564, 569 n.2, 133 S.Ct. 2064, 186 L.Ed.2d 113 (2013) (noting that the plaintiff might . . .

UNITED STATES v. BOSYK,, 933 F.3d 319 (4th Cir. 2019)

. . . United States , 277 U.S. 438, 472-73, 48 S.Ct. 564, 72 L.Ed. 944 (1928) (Brandeis, J., dissenting). . . .

VIEIRA, v. MENTOR WORLDWIDE, LLC LLC LLC, 392 F. Supp. 3d 1117 (C.D. Cal. 2019)

. . . Miles, Inc. , 980 F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir. 1992). . . .

BRAKEBILL v. JAEGER,, 932 F.3d 671 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . City of Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564, 573, 105 S.Ct. 1504, 84 L.Ed.2d 518 (1985) (quoting United States . . . See Brakebill III, 905 F.3d at 564 (Kelly, J., dissenting). . . .

YOC- US, v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES v., 932 F.3d 98 (3rd Cir. 2019)

. . . United States , 564 U.S. 229, 232, 131 S.Ct. 2419, 180 L.Ed.2d 285 (2011). . . .

IN RE WASHINGTON, v. N. A., 602 B.R. 710 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2019)

. . . Belice (In re Belice) , 461 B.R. 564, 572-73 (9th Cir. BAP 2011) (citations omitted). . . .

IN RE L. VENANZIO, J. v. U. S., 602 B.R. 921 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 2019)

. . . Marshall, 564 U.S. 462, 131 S.Ct. 2594, 180 L.Ed.2d 475 (2011), that this Court does not have the authority . . .

CELGENE CORPORATION, v. A. PETER, v. A., 931 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2019)

. . . P'ship , 564 U.S. 91, 96, 131 S.Ct. 2238, 180 L.Ed.2d 131 (2011) (describing district court challenges . . .

UNITED STATES v. DEL CARPIO FRESCAS,, 932 F.3d 324 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . Mississippi , 379 U.S. 443, 462, 85 S.Ct. 564, 13 L.Ed.2d 408 (1965) (Harlan, J., dissenting); see also . . . See Henry , 379 U.S. at 448, 85 S.Ct. 564 (majority op.); id. at 462-63, 85 S.Ct. 564 (Harlan, J., dissenting . . . See, e.g. , Henry , 379 U.S. at 448-49, 85 S.Ct. 564. . . .

NOVAK, v. CITY OF PARMA, 932 F.3d 421 (6th Cir. 2019)

. . . Bd. of Educ. , 116 Ohio App.3d 564, 688 N.E.2d 1058, 1061 (1996). . . .

GENETIC VETERINARY SCIENCES, INC. v. LABOKLIN GMBH CO. KG,, 933 F.3d 1302 (Fed. Cir. 2019)

. . . City of Bessemer City , 470 U.S. 564, 573-74, 105 S.Ct. 1504, 84 L.Ed.2d 518 (1985). . . .

POSADA, v. ACP FACILITY SERVICES, INC., 389 F. Supp. 3d 149 (D. Mass. 2019)

. . . Rumsfeld, 404 F.3d 556, 564 (1st Cir. 2005) (as applied to claims under Title VII); Everett v. 357 Corp . . .

DILLON BOILER SERVICES, CO. INC. v. SOUNDVIEW VERMONT HOLDINGS, LLC,, 392 F. Supp. 3d 187 (D. Mass. 2019)

. . . Brown , 564 U.S. 915, 919, 131 S.Ct. 2846, 180 L.Ed.2d 796 (2011) ). . . .

CALZONE, v. T. OLSON,, 931 F.3d 722 (8th Cir. 2019)

. . . Acton , 515 U.S. 646, 652-53, 115 S.Ct. 2386, 132 L.Ed.2d 564 (1995). . . .

COBA v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, 932 F.3d 114 (3rd Cir. 2019)

. . . T-Mobile USA, Inc. , 564 F.3d 1256, 1268 n.12 (11th Cir. 2009). . . .

IN RE HOME DEPOT INC. O v. U. S. A., 931 F.3d 1065 (11th Cir. 2019)

. . . Id. at 564-65, 112 S.Ct. 2638. . . . See Florin , 34 F.3d at 564-65 ("[W]e conclude that the holding in Dague ... forbidding risk multiples . . .

CALIFORNIA v. ABBVIE INC., 390 F. Supp. 3d 1176 (N.D. Cal. 2019)

. . . Miles, Inc. , 980 F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir. 1992). . . .

HIGHPOINT TOWER TECHNOLOGY INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,, 931 F.3d 1050 (11th Cir. 2019)

. . . Ct. at 564. . . . Ct. at 564. . . . Ct. at 564. . . . Ct. at 564. . . . Ct. at 564 )); RJT Invs., 491 F.3d at 737-38 (holding that a determination that a partnership is a sham . . .

EAST BAY SANCTUARY COVENANT, v. BARR,, 385 F. Supp. 3d 922 (N.D. Cal. 2019)

. . . Sessions , 889 F.3d 564, 568 (9th Cir. 2018) (quoting Chevron , 467 U.S. at 842, 104 S.Ct. 2778 ). . . . Co. , 564 U.S. 50, 69, 131 S.Ct. 2254, 180 L.Ed.2d 96 (2011) (Scalia, J., dissenting) (explaining in . . .

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION BY A. JAMES, v. QUINCY BIOSCIENCE HOLDING COMPANY, INC. LLC, d b a LLC,, 389 F. Supp. 3d 211 (S.D.N.Y. 2019)

. . . Amy Travel Service, Inc., 875 F.2d 564, 573 (7th Cir. 1989) ). The Complaint also describes Mr. . . .

E. CHAMBERS, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,, 389 F. Supp. 3d 77 (D.D.C. 2019)

. . . Dep't of Transp., 564 F.3d 462, 465-66 (D.C. Cir. 2009) ; Pub. Citizen Health Research Grp. v. . . .

OBASI INVESTMENT LTD Wu v. TIBET PHARMACEUTICALS, INC Yu Z. L. III Co. L. L. P. L. III,, 931 F.3d 179 (3rd Cir. 2019)

. . . First Derivative Traders , 564 U.S. 135, 141-42, 131 S.Ct. 2296, 180 L.Ed.2d 166 (2011). . . . Alloyd Co. , 513 U.S. 561, 564, 567, 115 S.Ct. 1061, 131 L.Ed.2d 1 (1995). . . .

HARTMAN v. THOMPSON, 931 F.3d 471 (6th Cir. 2019)

. . . Schs. , 655 F.3d 556, 564 (6th Cir. 2011) (internal quotation marks omitted), Drane and Hill are entitled . . .

KHRAPKO, v. SPLAIN,, 389 F. Supp. 3d 199 (W.D.N.Y. 2019)

. . . Olech , 528 U.S. 562, 564, 120 S.Ct. 1073, 145 L.Ed.2d 1060 (2000). . . .

UNITED STATES v. A. GOODRIDGE,, 392 F. Supp. 3d 159 (D. Mass. 2019)

. . . United States , 564 U.S. 1, 131 S.Ct. 2267, 180 L.Ed.2d 60 (2011). See Johnson , 135 S. . . . Am , 564 F.3d 25, 33 (1st Cir. 2009) ); see also United States v. . . .

IN RE J. LONG A., 603 B.R. 812 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. 2019)

. . . P'ship , 564 U.S. 91, 106, 131 S.Ct. 2238, 180 L.Ed.2d 131 (2011) ). . . .

WEEKS, a. k. a. v. UNITED STATES, 930 F.3d 1263 (11th Cir. 2019)

. . . United States, 915 F.3d 564, 568 (8th Cir. 2019) ; Lofton v. . . .

COMMUNICATIONS, INCORPORATED, v. CRAWFORD, v., 930 F.3d 715 (5th Cir. 2019)

. . . Dukes , 564 U.S. 338, 348, 131 S.Ct. 2541, 180 L.Ed.2d 374 (2011) (quoting Califano v. . . .