Why was the motion granted in the case against the corporation for violating federal law?

The motion was granted in the case against the corporation for violating federal law because there was no jurisdiction in State A. Jurisdiction is a critical requirement for any court to hear a case, as it determines whether the court has the authority to make a legal decision regarding the parties involved and the subject matter of the dispute.

In this context, if it was determined that State A was not the appropriate jurisdiction to address the federal law violation, the court would lack the power to adjudicate the case, leading to dismissal. This would commonly occur if the corporation was not based in that state or if the events giving rise to the violation occurred outside of State A, making it inappropriate for that court to handle the matter.

The other factors such as the proof of the violation, the plaintiff's standing, or the applicability of federal law would not sufficiently overcome the threshold issue of jurisdiction. If a court determines it has no jurisdiction, the case cannot be decided on the merits, rendering any further discussion of procedural or substantive claims unnecessary.