Search for: "JOHN DOES 1 -10" Results 2221 - 2240 of 9,150
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Jan 2015, 9:27 am by Rory Little
No, wrote the majority, “this Court, like all federal appellate courts, does not review lower courts’ opinion, but their judgments. [read post]
23 Apr 2013, 12:43 pm by John Elwood
John Elwood reviews Monday’s relisted cases. [read post]
15 Mar 2012, 7:33 am by James Saksa
  If you make $1 Billion, you aren't emerging anymore. [read post]
5 Mar 2012, 4:00 am by Terry Hart
Copyright law is generally justified under three theories.1 The first is the utilitarian, or consequentialist, basis. [read post]
14 Jan 2014, 4:50 pm by Cyrus Farivar
In the 124-page lawsuit, West’s attorneys accuse 0daycoins.com, coinye-exchange.com, newchg.com, “Jane Does 1 through 50,” “John Does 1 through 50,” “Fnu Lnu a/k/a Jonny Bravo,” Dogecoin, and Amazon of “willful trademark infringement, unfair competition, dilution, and rights of publicity violations among a score of other blatant statutory and common law violations. [read post]
30 Sep 2008, 4:38 pm
For example, ‘‘ 1983 John Doe" (17 U.S.C. 401) and ‘‘*M* John Doe" (17 U.S.C. 909) would be properly limited and, under current statutes, legally sufficient notices of copyright and mask work, respectively. [read post]
23 May 2012, 4:51 am by David Bernstein
Nor is there any particular reason to believe that John Roberts, Samuel Alito, et al., are in thrall to libertarian ideology. [read post]
4 Jul 2024, 9:00 pm by Meredith Ervine
Answer: EDGAR does not currently allow the entry of a co-registrant on draft registration statement submissions. [read post]
17 Jun 2009, 5:30 am
(Padilla is seeking a declaration that his rights were violated, and he requests damages in the amount of 1 dollar.) [read post]
27 Jul 2011, 2:10 am by John L. Welch
" What, pray tell, does Section 2(e)(1) have to do with genericness? [read post]
5 Apr 2010, 4:14 pm by Ryan MacIsaac
Phil Fontaine, former National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations, called the bill is “elitist” because it does not fully reflect the diversity of Canada. [read post]