Search for: "Quick v. United States"
Results 221 - 240
of 2,099
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Mar 2009, 5:16 pm
March 25, 2009) (available here) United States v. [read post]
29 Mar 2009, 5:16 pm
March 25, 2009) (available here) United States v. [read post]
8 Sep 2010, 8:30 pm
United States, 473 U.S. 207 (1985), that the National Stolen Property Act, 18 U. [read post]
2 Jan 2012, 9:25 pm
United States v. [read post]
6 Mar 2014, 8:17 pm
The next Apple v. [read post]
24 Sep 2023, 9:01 pm
Since that CFIUS determination, lawmakers in a growing number of U.S. states have been quick to introduce and, in some cases, pass legislation that restricts foreign ownership of land within their states by governments, individuals, and/or entities associated with certain identified “foreign adversaries” of the United States. [read post]
13 Mar 2025, 1:26 pm
The Federal Circuit recently heard oral arguments in the much-anticipated en banc review of EcoFactor, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Aug 2023, 11:08 am
According to the CDC, it is estimated that 1.4 million cases of salmonellosis occur each year in the United States. [read post]
22 Apr 2010, 10:34 am
” From United States v. [read post]
3 Feb 2011, 7:06 am
EPA, out of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. [read post]
11 Jul 2008, 8:20 pm
United States, 2008 U.S. [read post]
1 Apr 2011, 2:25 pm
Cooper and Juliette V. [read post]
6 Oct 2008, 10:39 pm
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently held that Major League Baseball's licensing of team logos was subject to rule of reason review under Section 1 of the Sherman Act. [read post]
24 Jun 2013, 6:08 am
On June 17, 2013, the United States Supreme Court announced a rule that blurs the lines between antitrust and patent law in the context of Hatch-Waxman litigation. [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 6:19 pm
And what better way to top things off, than with a quick update in United States v. [read post]
16 May 2008, 1:43 pm
Although urinalysis results may often be sufficiently reliable evidence that the opportunity for crossexamination is unnecessary for due process purposes, see United States v. [read post]
5 Mar 2008, 1:40 pm
See United States v. [read post]
2 Mar 2009, 2:00 am
United States (drug felony, misdemeanor, facilitate, cellular phone) Dean, Christopher M. v. [read post]
30 Jan 2010, 7:05 am
United States v. [read post]
11 May 2016, 4:03 am
Belmora's FLANAXBased on its reading of the Supreme Court’s Lexmark decision, the lower court had dismissed Bayer’s Section 43(a) false association and false advertising claims under FRCP 12(b)(6) and entered judgment on the pleadings as to Bayer’s Section 14(3) claim, ruling that the Lanham Act does not allow an owner of a foreign mark not registered in the United States, who does not use the mark in the United States [Bayer], to assert… [read post]
