Search for: "United States v. Holder"
Results 2501 - 2520
of 4,280
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Feb 2013, 8:43 am
It’s interesting that the United States hasn’t relied on the Elections Clause in its defense of Sections 4(b) and 5. [read post]
12 Feb 2013, 1:34 pm
The company long ago established that premise in the United States, successfully forcing two restaurant companies, McBagel’s and the vegetarian McDharma’s, to change their names. . . . [read post]
12 Feb 2013, 6:41 am
United States v. [read post]
11 Feb 2013, 2:22 pm
And when conflict is unavoidable, we should not come to do battle with the United States Congress armed only with a test (congruence and proportionality) that has no demonstrable basis in the text of the Constitution and cannot objectively be shown to have been met or failed. [read post]
7 Feb 2013, 6:20 am
United States, a challenge to the ban on direct corporate campaign spending in the Federal Campaign Finance Act, and McCutcheon v. [read post]
6 Feb 2013, 9:20 pm
Honeywell’s own allegations state that Arkema is marketing 1234yf to automobile manufacturers in the United States, and Arkema admits that it has already responded to at least one supply request from a U.S. automobile manufacturer and that it is “poised to respond to other requests for quotations to supply 1234yf. [read post]
6 Feb 2013, 10:58 am
The CAFC then dismissed the appeal as moot and remanded the case to “allow the Board to consider a motion to vacate its decision in the first instance, in accordance with United States Bancorp Mortgage Company v. [read post]
5 Feb 2013, 8:56 pm
First, both Holder and the White Paper argue, the individual must pose an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States. [read post]
4 Feb 2013, 11:03 am
After the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided last week to deny Apple's motion for a rehearing en banc (full-bench review) of the Nexus ruling, some commentators suggested that this was the end of Apple's push for sales bans against Samsung and, looking beyond that dispute, all makers of Android-based, patent-infringing devices. [read post]
4 Feb 2013, 6:35 am
Fteja v. [read post]
4 Feb 2013, 6:18 am
Perry, the challenge to California Proposition 8, and United States v. [read post]
3 Feb 2013, 9:01 pm
Next month, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in United States v. [read post]
31 Jan 2013, 3:50 pm
United States concerns the tariff classification of various glass and glass and metal decorative items that may or may not be used as candle holders. [read post]
30 Jan 2013, 11:37 am
§ 602(a)(1).That section provides that importing goods into the United States without the authority of the copyright holder is illegal. [read post]
30 Jan 2013, 11:37 am
§ 602(a)(1).That section provides that importing goods into the United States without the authority of the copyright holder is illegal. [read post]
30 Jan 2013, 11:37 am
§ 602(a)(1).That section provides that importing goods into the United States without the authority of the copyright holder is illegal. [read post]
30 Jan 2013, 11:37 am
§ 602(a)(1).That section provides that importing goods into the United States without the authority of the copyright holder is illegal. [read post]
30 Jan 2013, 11:37 am
§ 602(a)(1).That section provides that importing goods into the United States without the authority of the copyright holder is illegal. [read post]
29 Jan 2013, 1:24 pm
United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971) (refusing to stop the publication of classified documents about U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War); Florida Star v. [read post]
29 Jan 2013, 1:24 pm
United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971) (refusing to stop the publication of classified documents about U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War); Florida Star v. [read post]
