Search for: "Bank Line v. United States"
Results 241 - 260
of 1,506
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Dec 2014, 4:57 am
United States, the Facebook threats case, continues. [read post]
18 Aug 2015, 5:50 am
Bottom line: A covered business method (CBM) proceeding is a post patent grant proceeding at the United States Patent and Trademark Office. [read post]
6 May 2015, 5:03 am
United States v. [read post]
19 May 2017, 12:23 pm
; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. [read post]
10 Feb 2009, 3:58 pm
Case in point, courtesy of Eugene Volokh: a Ninth Circuit decision in United States v. [read post]
7 Dec 2023, 6:00 pm
The SCI clarified while referring to the Canara Bank decision:"In Canara Bank (supra), this Court did not apply the group of companies doctrine solely on the basis that the companies belonged to a single economic unit. [read post]
2 Dec 2023, 1:45 pm
National Australia Bank Ltd., 561 U.S. 247, 255 (2010). [read post]
20 Feb 2018, 8:01 am
The massive destruction of Syrian government forces through three hours of sustained bombardment by the United States Air Force – B52s, F-15s, MQ-9s, Ac-130s, AN-64 Apache helicopters – on the night of 7-8 February resulted in the deaths of at least a hundred Russian mercenaries, if not more (figures of 300 or more are being bandied about.) [read post]
9 Jan 2013, 6:36 pm
(IIT v. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 7:50 am
Black, 538 U.S. 343 (2003) (upholding criminal punishment for true threats); United States v. [read post]
5 Sep 2016, 7:43 am
United States v. [read post]
2 May 2016, 2:33 pm
For example, just over a hundred years ago, the Court ruled in United States v. [read post]
21 Dec 2017, 8:17 am
United States District Court, E.D. [read post]
21 Dec 2017, 8:17 am
United States District Court, E.D. [read post]
7 Jun 2008, 2:56 am
Maryland and United States v. [read post]
5 Jun 2017, 1:29 pm
See United States v. [read post]
1 Dec 2023, 10:14 am
This means that, although it may be inferred through the presence of a robust federal regulatory regime, there is not always a bright-line rule for whether a specific state policy will be preempted. [read post]
5 Oct 2011, 3:00 am
Walters v. [read post]
26 Mar 2010, 9:34 am
So jurisdiction in the case would be based not on effects within the United States -- an easier case for regulation, since U.S. investors would be involved -- but on conduct within the United States. [read post]
27 Feb 2019, 5:01 am
” the Treasury provided this explanation:The pertinent portion of law that applies to your question is the Coinage Act of 1965, specifically Section 31 U.S.C. 5103, entitled "Legal tender," which states: "United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues. [read post]
