Search for: "Brown v. Obama et al" Results 1 - 20 of 55
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Nov 2020, 1:25 pm by rainey Reitman
Circuit Offers Bad News, Good New on Net Neutrality: FCC Repeal Upheld, But States Can Fill the Gap (EFF) Mozilla v FCC EFF Amicus Brief (EFF) California's Net Neutrality Law: What Happened, What's Next (EFF)  CA’s Net Neutrality Law Letters of Supporters (EFF) Broad Coalition Urges Court Not to Block California's Net Neutrality Law (EFF) California Net Neutrality Cases - American Cable Association, et al v. [read post]
31 Oct 2018, 11:21 am by John Elwood
(relisted after the October 26 conference)   CTIA-The Wireless Association, et al. v. [read post]
22 Sep 2018, 8:20 am by Brenna Gautam, Julia Solomon-Strauss
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed et al. reconvened for pretrial proceedings, meeting in open session on Sept. 10, 11, and 12. [read post]
12 Jul 2018, 6:45 am by Jeff Wurzburg (US)
United States Department of Health and Human Services et al., in the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico (No.1:16-cv-00878). [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 3:02 pm by Timothy Kim
Employers are anticipating that the new Board and General Counsel will reform the following Obama-era precedents: Browning-Ferris Indus. of California, et al. v. [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 3:02 pm by Timothy Kim
Employers are anticipating that the new Board and General Counsel will reform the following Obama-era precedents: Browning-Ferris Indus. of California, et al. v. [read post]
8 Mar 2017, 10:00 am by Barbara S. Mishkin
Circuit denied various motions to intervene or for reconsideration of motions to intervene as follows: The motion of the plaintiffs in State National Bank of Big Spring, Texas, et al. v. [read post]
7 Jan 2017, 9:27 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Mike, it's not solo inventors or patent trolls that are flooding the USPTO with incremental concepts; it's IBM, Microsoft, Cisco, Apple, et al. [read post]
22 Feb 2016, 7:18 am by Podhurst Orseck
The high court in in 2012 dismissed as “improvidently granted review” First American v. [read post]