Search for: "Defendant Doe 1"
Results 201 - 220
of 45,937
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Feb 2009, 10:49 am
Does 1-16, an upstate case in which SUNY Albany students are being targeted, the Magistrate Judge has denied the motion by four (4) defendants to quash the subpoena.The Magistrate Judge pointed out in his decision that there were 5 issues, and that he had decided all 5 issues in favor of the plaintiffs.The defendants have 10 days to file objections.February 18, 2009, Decision of Magistrate Judge*-->* Document published online at Internet Law &… [read post]
12 May 2014, 11:24 am
The "John Doe" defendant in this copyright infringement lawsuit allegedly used the BitTorrent file-sharing protocol to illegally download, copy and distribute elements of various works of Malibu Media's copyrighted material. [read post]
30 Jul 2014, 7:10 am
Nevertheless, plaintiff demonstrates that defendant has 'engaged in a course of conduct... show[ing] a preparedness and willingness to enforce his patent rights.' Indeed, defendant has: (1) identified the [patent-in-suit]; (2) asserted he is the owner of the [patent]; (3) identified plaintiff’s competing product . . . (4) asserted that plaintiff’s 'design' . . . is 'a copy of the [product covered by the patent]'; and (5) sued… [read post]
7 May 2012, 5:28 am
Transfer under Section 1407 does not transmute all transferred actions into a single action, thereby joining all defendants. [read post]
16 Dec 2016, 6:56 am
[Defendant] does not demonstrate, as it must, that such conduct was unreasonable under the circumstances. [read post]
27 Jan 2008, 7:51 am
Defendant could be stopped for tinted window offense, and he could be ordered out of the car for officer safety, but that does not translate into an ability to frisk without reasonable suspicion. [read post]
22 May 2009, 11:47 am
The grounds: that "the proposed Order (1) purports to grant the Court jurisdiction it does not have, and (2) unfairly and improperly prejudices [defendants]. [read post]
3 Sep 2008, 8:48 pm
Our inquiry does not end here. [read post]
21 Sep 2017, 3:00 am
Related blog posts: Answer to Interrogatory Raises Insurance Policy Limits in Injured Worker Case to $1 Million-Enough to Pay Jury’s Verdict Reports of Incidents by Employees is Admissible Evidence When Claim is Made Against the Entity that Prepared the Report Illinois Appellate Court Holds that Power to Inspect the Work of a Contractor is Not the Control Needed to Give Rise to a Duty to a Contractor’s Employees The post Illinois Appellate Court Finds… [read post]
U.S. District Court (Alexandria): No Personal Jurisdiction Over Defendant In Website Defamation Case
18 Aug 2011, 1:45 pm
Grayson and John Doe # 1, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (Alexandria Division) [read post]
20 Dec 2009, 5:32 pm
And if so, how does he do it? [read post]
2 Feb 2016, 10:06 am
[1] Fed. [read post]
11 Feb 2011, 6:25 am
While the government cannot use an IRS civil audit to investigate an IRS criminal case, that does not make a later criminal case automatically a violation of the Fourth or Fifth Amendment. [read post]
17 May 2012, 8:42 am
Does 1-13, a subpoena addressed to Verizon, calling for the identities and addresses of John Doe defendants, was returnable May 12th.On May 10th the Court stayed enforcement of the subpoena, and directed plaintiff's counsel to immediately notify Verizon of the stay.Unfortunately, as it turns out, Verizon had responded to the subpoena FIVE (5) DAYS BEFORE THE SUBPOENA'S RETURN DATE, on May 7th.Plaintiff's "motion for clarification"[Ed.… [read post]
5 Jan 2018, 7:45 am
Wangs Alliance Corporation d/b/a WAC Lighting Co., 1-14-cv-12298 (MAD January 2, 2018, Order) (Casper, USDJ) [read post]
25 Oct 2008, 8:06 am
Specifically who has has the burden of proof of compliance or non-compliance and what does that burden entail? [read post]
27 May 2010, 4:11 am
LEXIS 208 (May 25, 2010).* [Does it actually matter? [read post]
2 Sep 2012, 8:34 am
Vermont No. 1:11-cr-111-jgm (August 13, 2012). [read post]
27 Oct 2009, 11:20 pm
The Defendant's reliance on the state court dismissal does not prove the existence of a viable suppression argument. [read post]
10 Jul 2009, 6:11 am
July 1, 2009): However, defendant's lack of possessory interest in the car does not end the standing inquiry. [read post]
