Search for: "U.S. Marine, Inc. v. United States" Results 221 - 240 of 360
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Aug 2020, 2:24 am by Schachtman
In addition to the temporal disconnect, the majority gave virtually no consideration to the three-way relationship between the product supplier defendants, the plaintiffs, and the plaintiffs’ employer, the United States government. [read post]
25 Jan 2007, 12:48 am
United States, 17 F.3d 890, 901 (6th Cir. 1994); Albrecht v. [read post]
12 May 2016, 6:14 pm by Jason Rantanen
One need only reflect on the fact that more than 1,000 qui tam actions for false marking were filed by opportunistic plaintiffs following the 2009 Federal Circuit decision in Forest Group, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Jun 2016, 11:40 am by Caitlin Gilligan, Rishabh Bhandari
” Another potential consequence would be ISIS turning to “less conventional military tactics” and inspiring attacks elsewhere including Europe and the United States. [read post]
24 Dec 2009, 8:02 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
Kirby Inland Marine Inc., 482 F.3d 347, 351 (5th Cir. 2007); Moore v. [read post]