Search for: "United States v. Territory of VI"
Results 301 - 320
of 321
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Jul 2010, 9:57 am
Paragraph 4 is amended to read as follows: “Recognizing the application of the Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Poland on the Status of the Armed Forces of the United States of America in the Territory of the Republic of Poland, done at Warsaw on December 11, 2009 (hereafter referred to as the “U.S. [read post]
8 Jun 2010, 7:34 pm
Rather, it is the combination of a 1913 decision of the United States Supreme Court, Michigan Central R.R. [read post]
18 Apr 2010, 1:28 pm
United States, 356 F.2d 541, 545 (Ct. [read post]
5 Apr 2010, 4:53 pm
V. [read post]
18 Mar 2010, 6:09 am
I’ve refrained so far from commenting on the Liz Cheney — AQ7 ad, but I want to make one lengthy statement on it and, I hope, leave it at that. [read post]
17 Feb 2010, 11:15 am
A statute or any case law developed in the United States and its territories that is based on Anglo-American legal tradition and principles on which the United States was founded. 2. [read post]
11 Jan 2010, 4:08 pm
Stiftelsen SINTEF (EPLAW) Poland Voivodeship Administrative Court: Design, freedom and Polish law: VI SA / Wa 518/09 (Class 99) Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia looking into setting up special IP courts (IP Factor) South Africa Western Cape High Court finds in favour of Trimega, grants interim interdict preventing Real World Diagnostics from using IP related to drink-driving breathalysers (Afro-IP) (Afro-IP) United Kingdom Civil Law Reform Bill: latest news… [read post]
4 Jan 2010, 1:57 pm
First, Deere asserts that the Commission erred in determining whether “all or substantially all of Deere’s sales in the United States were of North American forage harvesters” as set forth in Bourdeau Bros. v. [read post]
17 Nov 2009, 1:00 pm
In United States v. [read post]
23 Oct 2009, 9:09 am
VI, "Questions of International Law. [read post]
18 Aug 2009, 2:16 am
Such auditor must also sign off on the fund's audited financial statements which are to be submitted annually to CIMA.) v) Administrator's letter of consent (no requirement for local administrator); vi) Registration fee (approximately US$3,000 (subject to change)) What Are the Costs for CIMA Registered Funds? [read post]
2 Aug 2009, 11:35 pm
The Act defines "investigation business" as a business that, for a fee, reward, or other consideration, . . . accepts employment to furnish. . . or makes an investigation for the purpose of obtaining information with reference to any of the following: (i) Crimes or wrongs done or threatened against the United States or a state or territory of the United States, or any other person or legal entity. . . [read post]
26 Jun 2009, 4:09 pm
The Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1, reads in full: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. [read post]
24 Apr 2009, 3:30 am
Moreover, respondent's focus solely on petitioner's extra-territorial use fails to take account of the fact that respondent's use is in the United States and to the extent such use may be misrepresenting to consumers making purchases in the United States that petitioner is the source of respondent's products, the misrepresentation is alleged by petitioner to be occurring in the United States. [read post]
16 Apr 2009, 9:52 pm
But on April 1, your Georgia Senate did threaten by a vote of 43-1 to secede from and even disband the United States. [read post]
7 Dec 2008, 1:57 pm
United States v. [read post]
11 Oct 2008, 10:50 pm
Baumbast v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Case C-413/99, [2002] ECR I-07091 was raised. [read post]
23 Aug 2008, 11:13 am
Bryza is suggesting that a lame-duck President who, I hope, will have been soundly repudiated in November by the victory of Obama-Biden, would view himself as having the legitimate authority to bind the United States to the defense of Georgia's territorial integrity (at least if one takes Article V of NATO seriously). [read post]
5 May 2008, 4:52 pm
[vi] Id. at p.10. [read post]
10 Mar 2008, 5:28 am
" United States v. [read post]
