Search for: "One or more John Does-1" Results 1 - 20 of 9,163
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Mar 2015, 6:41 am
One of the factors is that the violation of the Act caused “loss to 1 or more persons during any 1-year period . . . aggregating at least $5,000 in value”. [read post]
20 Apr 2008, 1:41 pm
Does 1-14 (Phoenix, AZ) was turned over one day after John Doe #3 had filed a motion to quash the subpoena, and on the same day that John Doe #8 joined in John Doe #3's motion.We have no idea how this happened, but it would seem that (a) the University of Arizona should not have responded to the subpoena when a motion to quash the subpoena had been filed, and (b) the motions to quash aren't going to be of much… [read post]
5 Nov 2014, 11:15 am by Stewart Baker
Our guest is one of the most highly regarded cybercrime prosecutors in the country – John Lynch, the Chief of the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS) in DOJ’s Criminal Division. [read post]
2 Jun 2012, 12:12 pm by Abhik Majumdar
In many legal systems, particularly western ones, this is known as a "John Doe" order. [read post]
19 Oct 2006, 6:24 am
For what it's worth, although John gets the big picture of the MCA right, there are several inaccurate statements in John's Op/Ed, including these: 1. [read post]
27 Feb 2017, 1:52 pm by Edward A. Fallone
Supreme Court has raised more questions about the reasoning which the Wisconsin Supreme Court used to resolve the John Doe Investigation. [read post]
29 Oct 2014, 6:20 am by Dennis Crouch
Although the paper does not delve into this, the phenomenon here is almost certainly not one of straight causation. [read post]
11 Jan 2012, 8:26 am
JOHN LOOS: Well, every time a valuer of ours does a property valuation we ask them to rate demand and supply in the market in that area. [read post]
1 May 2013, 1:36 pm by Ron Coleman
 John Doe #2, perhaps, gets the benefit of Supreme Court rule-making, according to this opinion; but first John Doe #1 has to have his cover blown. [read post]