Search for: "United States v. Ocean" Results 221 - 240 of 783
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Jun 2022, 5:36 am by Bernard Bell
Regulatory Background The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (“MSA”) establishes a program to conserve and manage of fishery resources within 200 nautical miles of the United States coastline. [read post]
8 Aug 2011, 4:25 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
The patent is assigned to The United States of America, represented by the Secretary of Commerce. [read post]
16 Aug 2010, 9:56 pm by BLOG
People's United Bank d/b/a Ocean Bank, filed in state court in Maine, tees up this very question for resolution.Patco alleges that it has been a customer of Ocean Bank. [read post]
13 Aug 2011, 3:06 pm by Mark Murakami
  An environmental group has brought a federal court lawsuit against various federal officials seeking to enjoin the issuance of permits to the Kona Blue Water Fish aquaculture operation. [read post]
13 Feb 2017, 7:55 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Federal Courts Bulletinhttp://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/federal/2017.htmlUnited States v. [read post]
14 Mar 2010, 2:59 pm by Mark Murakami
The Question Presented is: Whether the Carmack Amendment to the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887, which governs certain rail and motor transportation by common carriers within the United States, 49 U.S.C. [read post]
24 Nov 2010, 2:26 am by Goldberg Segalla LLP
  In April 2010, the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri denied the reinsurers’ motion. [read post]
27 Mar 2014, 8:36 am by WIMS
Appeals Court Environmental Decisions   <> Organized Village of Kake v. [read post]
15 Apr 2014, 9:15 am by Ritika Singh
Hearings at Guantanamo Bay on United States v. [read post]
29 Jan 2018, 9:14 am by Dennis Crouch
Joseph Matal, Interim Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office, No. 17-643 Audatex North America, Inc. v. [read post]
21 May 2015, 6:00 am by Dennis N. Brager
Those who perform work outside of a nation-state may not be eligible A recent DC Circuit Appeals Court decision, Rogers v. [read post]