receiver, particularly because the scope of a bankruptcy receiver’s power is set forth in statutes. See, e.g., In re Cannon, 277 F.3d 838, 848 (6th Cir.2002) (noting that a bankruptcy statute grants a bankruptcy trustee the standing and power to avoid the transfer of an interest in property); see also In re Van Dresser Corp., 128 F.3d 945, 947 (6th Cir.1997) (construing the scope of a bankruptcy estate under the relevant bankruptcy statutes). The Receiver has standing to pursue claims against the brokerage firms because he has been expressly authorized by the district court to bring claims on behalf of the receivership estate and defrauded investors. The Receiver is assigned the rights of the parties he is representing. See, e.g., Goodman v. FCC, 182 F.3d 987, 991-92 (D.C.Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>). While this representation is often limited to
holding that plaintiffs lacked standing to sue holding that courts lack jurisdiction to address merits of a claim where party raising the claim is found to lack standing to maintain suit holding that a litigant may not claim standing to assert the rights of a third party holding that employers have standing to sue holding that a receiver may lack standing to sue if the party he is representing cannot allege an injury or assert a claim