Search for: "United States v. General Elec."
Results 181 - 200
of 296
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Apr 2019, 2:24 pm
App’x 933, 941 (11th Cir. 2009) (holding that because the Guidelines are not mandatory, the fact that a covered complex does not comply with the Guidelines does not establish a violation of the FHAA); United States v. [read post]
26 Apr 2009, 6:17 am
Ross v Curtis-Palmer Hydro-Elec. [read post]
15 Dec 2010, 2:00 am
United States Canopy Co., [77 S.W. 1062, 1063 (Tenn. 1903)]; General Constr. [read post]
14 Jul 2011, 1:26 pm
United States Gypsum Co., 302 S.C. 390, 396 S.E.2d 369 (1990). [read post]
23 Sep 2017, 12:39 pm
Samsung Elecs., Co., 786 F.3d 983, 1002-03 (Fed. [read post]
Apple filing reveals Samsung recently reduced its 2.4% royalty demand for standard-essential patents
5 Apr 2013, 10:17 am
Samsung Elecs. [read post]
19 May 2014, 5:00 am
The United States District Court held that the ordinance was a fee for the purposes of the TIA. [read post]
10 May 2011, 4:43 pm
Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc.Docket: 10-778Issue(s): Whether the court of appeals correctly affirmed the lower court’s dismissal at the pleading stage, based on the evidentiary state secrets privilege, of a suit seeking compensation for the petitioners' unlawful abduction, arbitrary detention, and torture.Certiorari stage documents:Opinion below (9th Circuit)Petition for certiorariBrief in opposition for the United States Brief in opposition for respondent Jeppesen… [read post]
31 Oct 2018, 10:04 am
Their article noted that judges easily grasped the problem of generalizing from animal evidence to human experience, and thus they simplistically emphasized human (epidemiologic) data. [read post]
27 Aug 2023, 6:25 am
United States, 409 U.S. 239, 243 (1972)) (“[S]tatutes addressing the same subject matter generally should be read ‘as if they were one law. [read post]
16 Apr 2011, 11:22 am
Elec. [read post]
11 Oct 2023, 9:25 am
This article addresses the applicability of the FAR Cost Principles and their general criteria for determining the allowability of costs. [read post]
4 Jun 2018, 3:04 pm
" United Nuclear Corp v. [read post]
9 Jun 2021, 6:42 am
United States and Webster Elec. [read post]
17 Sep 2014, 7:00 am
We foresee no obstacle to a State’s dealing effectively with this problem. [read post]
“No License, No Problem” – Is Qualcomm’s Ninth Circuit Antitrust Victory a Patent Exhaustion Defeat?
1 Sep 2020, 7:35 am
United States, 273 U.S. 236, 241 (1927), “No formal granting of a license is necessary in order to give it effect. [read post]
2 Oct 2016, 12:11 pm
See United States v. [read post]
11 May 2018, 1:01 pm
GOV’T CODE § 311.034; Oncor Elec. [read post]
31 Jul 2008, 5:30 pm
Accord Phelps v. [read post]
3 Nov 2014, 3:05 am
; * A clear vision of genuine use: Specsavers v Asda (again); * Chemists and mech/elecs unite! [read post]
