Search for: "United States v. Quinn" Results 1 - 20 of 455
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
(Editor’s Note: The statement below is collectively signed by 22 former United Nations Special Rapporteurs and former UN experts in the field of human rights on the situation in Rafah and the obligations of UN Member States.) [read post]
4 Oct 2023, 7:41 am by Norman L. Eisen
Expand all Collapse all Relevant Court Proceedings United States v. [read post]
3 Apr 2023, 2:22 am by INFORRM
On 29 March 2023, judgment was handed down by Saini J in the3million & Anor, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor [2023] EWHC 713 (Admin). [read post]
22 Feb 2023, 1:07 pm by Dennis Crouch
As a point of context, it’s worth noting that many states already require disclosure or much more draconian regulation of litigation funders backing state court cases—for instance, some states require funds and funders to register, and some even require funding agreements to be disclosed with the state. [read post]
5 Jan 2023, 5:23 pm by Eugene Volokh
Quinn (7th Cir. 2017) (holding that appointed workers' compensation arbitrators can be dismissed as "the face of the administration"); Walsh v. [read post]
14 Dec 2022, 6:14 am by Eugene Volokh
As the United States Supreme Court has noted, "People in an open society do not demand infallibility from their institutions, but it is difficult for them to accept what they are prohibited from observing. [read post]
22 Jun 2022, 4:15 am by Eileen McDermott
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) on Tuesday announced that it has updated its interim guidance on the Director Review process under Arthrex v. [read post]
22 Jun 2022, 4:15 am by Eileen McDermott
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) on Tuesday announced that it has updated its interim guidance on the Director Review process under Arthrex v. [read post]
31 May 2022, 6:48 am by Dennis Crouch
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) and the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia have barred such inventions from being patented. [read post]