Search for: "Marvelle v. State"
Results 221 - 240
of 480
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Jun 2015, 9:01 pm
Dukes v. [read post]
10 Jun 2015, 2:54 pm
The Court heard nine cases during the March session when Michigan v. [read post]
16 May 2015, 7:51 pm
(LCB) Dear friends, Betita's reference to Sartre was marvelous. [read post]
7 May 2015, 1:02 pm
See United States v. [read post]
6 May 2015, 7:52 am
This decision is a marvelous irony to me, because Chief Justice Robert’s majority opinion pretty much debunks everything Justice Scalia wrote in Republican Party of Minnesota v. [read post]
1 May 2015, 12:39 am
In response Cameron has re-stated his intention to cut the benefit cap from £26,000 to £23,000 saying it will ‘Cause a stampede to the job centre’. [read post]
22 Apr 2015, 3:53 pm
It is tailor-made to ensure that public figures do not have to be worried about New York Times v. [read post]
22 Apr 2015, 4:30 am
April 16, 2015), to that list of Maryland marvels. [read post]
10 Apr 2015, 6:45 am
In an op-ed for The Legal Intelligencer (subscription or registration required), Charles Kelbley looks back at the recent oral argument in Arizona State Legislature v. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 5:09 am
Tuesday’s decision in Armstrong v. [read post]
1 Apr 2015, 7:51 am
Yesterday’s decision in Armstrong v. [read post]
26 Mar 2015, 8:45 am
First up is Kimble v. [read post]
6 Mar 2015, 12:58 pm
Marvel Enterprises, Inc. to decide whether it should overrule Brulotte v. [read post]
19 Jan 2015, 6:28 pm
It had its legal beginning in 1896, when the Supreme Court rendered a decision known as the Plessy v. [read post]
5 Jan 2015, 5:08 am
After six marvellous months with Marie-Andrée, Rebecca and Lucas, it is now time to meet Valentina, Suleman and Tom.* The New USPTO Interim Guidance on Patent Subject Matter EligibilitySuleman’s debut post is about the new United States Patent and Trademark Office's Interim Guidance on Subject Matter Eligibility, which has the purpose of assisting the USPTO staff in examination and post-grant proceedings to determine whether claimed subject matter is eligible… [read post]
2 Jan 2015, 5:33 am
In the case that is the subject of the appeal, Kimble v. [read post]
2 Jan 2015, 3:30 am
A notable exception was the Court’s 1954 decision in Brown v. [read post]
19 Dec 2014, 12:31 pm
United States and Printz v. [read post]
19 Dec 2014, 1:33 am
Meanwhile, on the PatLit blog, David Berry reports on yet another patent case that the US Supreme Court is happy to hear, Kimble v Marvel Enterprises, which will revisit the rule in Brulotte v Thys and the endearing practice of extracting royalty payments from a licensee after the patent has expired (this patent involves a Spiderman toy, if you were wondering). [read post]
18 Dec 2014, 7:08 am
Marvel Enterprises, Inc., 13-720, which asks whether the Court should overrule Brulotte v. [read post]
