Search for: "Lucas v. District Court"
Results 181 - 200
of 272
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Apr 2007, 10:13 pm
Supreme Court decision Atkins v. [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 11:17 am
He also was successful in a reversal by the Supreme Court of an obscenity conviction, Hartstein v. [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 11:17 am
He also was successful in a reversal by the Supreme Court of an obscenity conviction, Hartstein v. [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 10:19 am
He also was successful in a reversal by the Supreme Court of an obscenity conviction, Hartstein v. [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 10:19 am
He also was successful in a reversal by the Supreme Court of an obscenity conviction, Hartstein v. [read post]
19 Feb 2016, 3:58 pm
Lucas v. [read post]
14 Jun 2013, 4:28 am
Sixth Circuit Uses Dukes v. [read post]
14 Jun 2013, 4:28 am
Sixth Circuit Uses Dukes v. [read post]
14 Apr 2009, 2:39 pm
Supreme Court of an obscenity conviction Hartstein v. [read post]
14 Apr 2009, 2:39 pm
Supreme Court of an obscenity conviction Hartstein v. [read post]
22 Jul 2021, 12:56 pm
Writing for the court in Protect Our Parks v. [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 6:02 am
v. [read post]
22 Jul 2022, 12:31 pm
Lucas (Mass. 2015). [read post]
7 Aug 2011, 11:24 pm
Lucas v. [read post]
7 Aug 2011, 11:24 pm
Lucas v. [read post]
2 Sep 2010, 11:41 pm
Philips Corp (Patently-O) District Court N D Illinois refers to input ‘Directly’ its claim from the specification: Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 11:00 pm
Amazon.com Inc (Docket Report) District Court E D Texas: Patent case transferred to California, citing location of defendants and witnesses: Software Archives v. [read post]
8 Apr 2008, 9:47 am
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, April 03, 2008 US v. [read post]
4 Feb 2017, 5:33 am
Luca Marzorati previewed the argument in John Doe v. [read post]
10 Jan 2013, 12:03 pm
Munsingwear, and thus improperly relied on the district court’s factual findings and legal rulings in an earlier case that was vacated as moot while on appeal, even though other courts of appeals have interpreted Munsingwear as rendering a vacated decision a nullity, as if it the case had never been filed, and draining its factual findings of all vitality; (2) whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit misconstrued Rule 60(b)(5) of the… [read post]
