Search for: "D.J.2"
Results 201 - 220
of 250
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Dec 2010, 4:41 pm
Decision by Alaska D.J. [read post]
7 Dec 2010, 5:00 am
D.J. [read post]
6 Dec 2010, 7:57 am
Smith with Thomas and Ezra, D.J., D. [read post]
12 Nov 2010, 3:41 am
., decided on November 2. [read post]
7 Nov 2010, 6:18 pm
” Id. at 2. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 10:12 am
Leal-Felix, No. 09-50426 (11-1-10) (Goodwin with Rawlison; dissent by Bennett, D.J., N. [read post]
3 Nov 2010, 5:18 am
Benford, No. 2:09CR86, 2010 WL 1266507 (N.D. [read post]
30 Sep 2010, 2:21 pm
Sipal, No. 08-10300 (9-30-10) (Hug with Bea and Edmunds, D.J.). [read post]
27 Sep 2010, 4:20 pm
Ruiz-Gaxiola, No. 08-10378 (9-24-10) (Reinhardt with Kozinski and Timlin, D.J.). [read post]
18 Sep 2010, 8:31 am
D.J. [read post]
11 Sep 2010, 9:53 am
Sept. 2, 2010).In a patent/trademark case in which the district court made some seemingly bizarre trademark rulings, the Federal Circuit held that a trademark invalidity declaratory judgment cannot be dismissed for lack of an Article III case or controversy where the mark owner has actually sued the party seeking the D.J. for infringement. [read post]
26 Aug 2010, 4:28 am
The Court of Appeals (Hall, Straub and Eaton [D.J.]) reinstates the case.Leifer was subjected to six hostile comments from supervisors over a three-year period. [read post]
23 Aug 2010, 8:07 am
Fletcher and Walter, D.J.). [read post]
14 Aug 2010, 5:02 am
Copyright started out as 14 years, 2 7-year periods of apprenticeship; same with patent. [read post]
18 Jul 2010, 8:42 pm
Lambert, No. 09-35276 (9th Cir 7/6/2010) (O’Scannlain joined by Wolle, D.J.; concurrence by N. [read post]
15 Jul 2010, 5:37 am
Ruiz also knew about more misconduct than comparator No. 2 did. [read post]
8 Jul 2010, 12:17 pm
Graf, No. 07-50100 (7-7-10) (Tallman with O'Scannlain and Block, D.J.). [read post]
14 Jun 2010, 9:11 am
Evid. 801(d)(2)(C). [read post]
28 Apr 2010, 6:15 am
Reversing the district court on this issue, the Second Circuit (Parker, Cabranes and Amon [D.J.]) allows the officers to intervene. [read post]
