Search for: "United States v. Small"
Results 2181 - 2200
of 6,883
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Apr 2017, 10:44 am
At any rate, I would view the $5 per-unit refund to BlackBerry as another indication of my $20 per-unit royalty estimate not having been off base.If Qualcomm's royalty levels are indeed extremely high, it comes as no surprise that various major automative and information and communications technology companies are interested in the ongoing FTC v. [read post]
11 May 2019, 11:47 am
This was expected, given the Texas Supreme Court’s highly selective use of discretionary review and lack of interest in run-of-the-mill collection cases involving small amounts (here, about $4,000). [read post]
4 Oct 2019, 11:20 am
Following the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in South Dakota v. [read post]
12 Apr 2025, 11:42 pm
“Small” indeed. [read post]
21 Dec 2011, 6:29 am
United States: Judge Roger W. [read post]
21 Dec 2011, 6:29 am
United States: Judge Roger W. [read post]
20 Mar 2013, 3:23 pm
§ 109(a), must mean “lawfully made in the United States”); see generally P. [read post]
20 Mar 2013, 3:23 pm
In a dramatically divided but decisively 6-3 decision in Kirtsaeng v. [read post]
20 Jun 2023, 11:51 am
This makes Texas the first U.S. state to include the small business exception in state privacy law. [read post]
31 Dec 2010, 10:38 am
United States, 281 F.3d 158, 161 (5th Cir.2001)). [read post]
22 Apr 2014, 7:41 am
In Eisai Co. v. [read post]
20 Jun 2024, 6:25 am
Finally, it is likely that the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit will be the first appellate court to consider and apply Kaiser Gypsum. [read post]
20 Jun 2024, 6:25 am
Finally, it is likely that the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit will be the first appellate court to consider and apply Kaiser Gypsum. [read post]
20 Jun 2024, 6:25 am
Finally, it is likely that the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit will be the first appellate court to consider and apply Kaiser Gypsum. [read post]
8 Jan 2007, 3:22 pm
v. [read post]
7 Jun 2018, 12:16 pm
The early dismissal would be final as to that claim, see United States v. [read post]
21 Jul 2011, 5:08 am
The second is perhaps more difficult for some people to swallow: "Because the United States is a distinct sovereign, a defendant may in principle be subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of the United States but not of any particular State. [read post]
5 Aug 2011, 3:57 pm
Frequently, Dean Chemerinsky argues appellate cases, including in the United States Supreme Court. [read post]
18 May 2010, 6:24 am
After the decision in Forest Group, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Mar 2023, 10:08 pm
Approximately half of women over the age of 40 in the United States have dense breast tissue. [read post]
