Search for: "GRANT et al v. HOLDER et al"
Results 261 - 280
of 463
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
Non-final orders, jurisdiction, and fresh pasta with tomatoes, rosemary and braised kale with garlic
4 Mar 2012, 1:47 pm
ROUTH, Appellant, v. [read post]
28 Feb 2012, 5:09 am
Matosantos as Director et al. [read post]
21 Feb 2012, 7:59 am
The agreement to hear the case was one of two grants of new cases. [read post]
1 Feb 2012, 10:31 am
Artesyn Technologies Inc., et al. [read post]
18 Jan 2012, 8:11 am
The 6-2 decision (with Justice Elena Kagan not taking part) came in the case of Golan, et al., v. [read post]
16 Jan 2012, 10:02 am
WANDA GREENWOOD ET AL. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 5:40 am
Granted, Mr. [read post]
6 Jan 2012, 12:31 pm
Prince et al, 784 F.Supp.2d 337 (S.D. [read post]
27 Dec 2011, 6:13 am
Petition for certiorari Brief in opposition Amicus brief of Texas et al. [read post]
19 Dec 2011, 1:38 pm
Supreme Court entertained oral argument in Mayo Collaborative Services v. [read post]
14 Dec 2011, 1:14 pm
Jurisdictional Statement Motion of Federal Election Commission to dismiss or affirm Opposition to motion to dismiss or affirm Amicus brief of Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights et al. [read post]
12 Dec 2011, 8:00 am
” Today’s granted cases: Arizona v. [read post]
2 Dec 2011, 9:44 pm
At 10 a.m. next Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hold one hour of oral argument on Mayo Collaborative Services, et al., v. [read post]
2 Dec 2011, 9:44 pm
At 10 a.m. next Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hold one hour of oral argument on Mayo Collaborative Services, et al., v. [read post]
21 Nov 2011, 9:04 pm
As the Supreme Court put it in a 1984 decision (Bob Jones University v. [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 4:46 pm
Kappos et al., Case No. 2010-1534, perhaps starting (or ending) another chapter in the saga over a Patent Term Extension (“PTE”) for U.S. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 6:25 pm
In Adams v. [read post]
7 Nov 2011, 9:36 am
The case is Knox, et al., v. [read post]
2 Nov 2011, 12:45 pm
Holder, No. 10-545. [read post]
31 Oct 2011, 1:32 am
In 2001, the case of Golan et al v Holder was brought by a collection of plaintiffs, including orchestra conductors, educators, performers, motion picture distributors and publishers against the United States government alleging that Section 514 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA)- section 104A and 109 of the Copyright Act - is unconstitutional. [read post]
