Search for: "United States v. Close" Results 2861 - 2880 of 14,190
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
31 Jan 2023, 1:21 am by Florian Mueller
" Google opposes any trial date earlier than November 6 because of a potential conflict with the trial in the first United States et al. v. [read post]
21 Dec 2010, 1:59 am by gmlevine
He says, “[e]ven the renown of Complainant and its marks does not confer a worldwide monopoly on the right to use the word APPLE or a variant in a domain name, under the Policy or under United States trademark law. [read post]
15 May 2008, 10:14 pm
  Here is the abstract:This article closely analyzes the five separate opinions in Morse v. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 9:04 am by Corporate Action Network
This infamous moment in the United States’ “global war on terror” will forever remain an ugly scar on our nation’s legacy as a people that (allegedly) value human rights and protect human dignity. [read post]
11 Apr 2023, 8:24 am by zola.support.team
In contrast, the seller’s business was generally limited to the Northwest area of the United States. [read post]
20 Mar 2022, 9:44 am by Joel R. Brandes
Throughout their time in the United States, Respondent has ensured that AC kept in contact with her father. [read post]
14 Aug 2012, 5:00 am by Charlotte Law Library
Even in the United States, our freedoms are regularly challenged. [read post]
22 Jul 2016, 7:55 pm
By 2008 U.S. courts deemed the area to be under de facto sovereignty of the United States (Boumediene v. [read post]
27 Sep 2018, 8:27 am
  Or, at a minimum, explain why it comes out 180 degrees differently than the opinion of the United States Supreme Court. [read post]
17 Mar 2013, 9:01 pm by Joanna L. Grossman and Leon Friedman
  His persistence would change the face of criminal justice in the United States. [read post]
10 Jul 2014, 9:58 pm
In 1992, the Supreme Court of the United States heard a case called Quill v. [read post]
24 Aug 2011, 9:47 am by Stacia Lay
Nonetheless, while stating that it was "perhaps a close call" but "comforted" by the Supreme Court's decision in Quality King, the Second Circuit held that the first sale defense in Section 109(a) applies only to copies of copyrighted works manufactured in the United States. [read post]