Search for: "GRANT et al v. HOLDER et al" Results 241 - 260 of 463
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Feb 2013, 11:42 am by Docket Navigator
Advanced Image Direct LLC, et. al., 8-12-cv-01090 (CACD January 30, 2013, Order) (Carter, J.). [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 7:44 am by John Elwood
Holder, 12-81, and Shelby County v. [read post]
27 Oct 2012, 8:47 am by David Post
(David Post) Yesterday, a group of 34 law professors filed an amicus brief that I drafted in the 2d Circuit’s WNET  et al v Aereo case. [read post]
23 Oct 2012, 5:12 am by Kevin Smith, J.D.
It is not a case that draws much attention from higher education circles, but the case of WNET et al. v Aereo has drawn an amicus brief that should worry anyone who is interested in how copyright law serves or inhibits innovation and competition. [read post]
7 Oct 2012, 2:43 pm
Geithner, et al., a petition to review a decision by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia. [read post]
11 Sep 2012, 6:30 am
[1] The case is captioned Sykes v Mel Harris and Associates, LLC, et al., US Dist Ct SDNY 09-Civ 8486, Chin, J., September 4, 2012, and the opinion is currently available on Westlaw at 2012 WL 3834802 and in the New York Law Journal here [read post]
9 Jul 2012, 1:11 pm
Lemley et al., Life After Bilski, 63 Stan. [read post]
29 Jun 2012, 10:30 am by WSLL
Vic and Jane Garber, et al. [read post]
13 Jun 2012, 1:26 pm by admin
” (Attorney General Eric Holder, April 11, 2012) “This was competition on the merits, with Apple providing a superior reading platform on a beautiful 10 inch iPad screen, with color, multi-media, and fixed display, and access to millions of future iPad purchasers. [read post]
5 Jun 2012, 6:51 pm
[ii] For a detailed discussion on how the term ‘control’ has been defined under other statutes and regulations of India, See Sandip Bhagat et al., India: Defining Control, International Financial Law Review (IFLR), June 10, 2010. [read post]
29 May 2012, 10:02 am by Lyle Denniston
The Court did grant one new case, Marx v. [read post]