Search for: "Query v. United States"
Results 321 - 340
of 724
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Nov 2016, 8:20 am
To make matters more complicated, the network is structured at one major provider so that only employees from inside the United States can query it. [read post]
30 Sep 2016, 2:31 am
Chutter, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Sep 2016, 12:51 pm
The `unknown’ query return was the only basis for the traffic stop. [read post]
8 Sep 2016, 9:01 pm
That case—G.G. v. [read post]
5 Sep 2016, 8:11 am
” (Here, on the defendant’s dime).United States v. [read post]
19 Aug 2016, 7:47 am
As a result, for the last 14 years, every time MaxMind’s database has been queried about the location of an IP address in the United States it can’t identify, it has spit out the default location of a spot two hours away from the geographic center of the country. [read post]
11 Aug 2016, 3:41 pm
Inherent in this process is recognition that a lexical unit is functioning as a referent and not as a description. [read post]
3 Jul 2016, 4:09 pm
The US government has said that the Irish Data Protection Commissioner’s action querying the validity of the main channels being used for EU-US data transfers is “of the utmost importance to the United States and to the broader public”. [read post]
1 Jul 2016, 6:31 am
MCL 28.211a(b) defines `nonpublic information’ as `information to which access, use, or dissemination is restricted by a law or rule of this state or the United States. [read post]
19 Jun 2016, 9:10 am
United States v. [read post]
Has the government been using its copy service to spy on defense work product for the past 10 years?
3 Jun 2016, 6:30 am
But query why it took 10 years for any prosecutor or agent to speak up. [read post]
30 May 2016, 10:00 am
* IP wrangling (briefly) delays Mourinho's anointment as new Manchester United managerWhat was the hold up with the Special One's latest deal? [read post]
10 May 2016, 2:05 pm
Related Cases: Jewel v. [read post]
9 May 2016, 4:00 am
” Op. at 19, quoting United States v. [read post]
9 May 2016, 4:00 am
” Op. at 19, quoting United States v. [read post]
7 May 2016, 6:56 pm
Probably United States v. [read post]
28 Apr 2016, 11:29 am
As found by the Federal Court in State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. [read post]
27 Apr 2016, 3:05 pm
” The DTSA reaffirms this principle by stating that “[n]othing in the amendments made by this section shall be construed to modify the rule of construction under section 1838 of title 18, United States Code, or to preempt any other provision of law. [read post]
21 Apr 2016, 4:24 pm
The Supreme Court rejected the latter scenario as unconstitutional in Ferguson v. [read post]
20 Apr 2016, 6:55 pm
If that were true, she queried, why exactly would the state have to forge ahead without one? [read post]
