Search for: "Jones v. United States"
Results 3401 - 3420
of 3,760
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Sep 2008, 11:24 pm
Graham; AmosGuiora; Samuel V. [read post]
19 Sep 2008, 6:00 pm
: (Danny Weitzner - Open Internet Policy), United States: How many lines is de minimis? [read post]
12 Sep 2008, 11:53 pm
(As amended in 2006, the Lanham Act requires that a mark be "widely recognized by the general consuming public of the United States. [read post]
9 Sep 2008, 2:25 pm
Horn, No. 03-9010, 03-9011 In a capital-murder case, petition for a writ of habeas corpus is granted where: 1) the time period for filing the petition was tolled during state-court proceedings, and the federal petition was therefore timely; 2) the state fugitive-forfeiture rule did not apply to procedurally default the petition; 3) the jury instructions and verdict sheet that were used during the penalty phase of petitioner's trial denied him due process of law pursuant to… [read post]
7 Sep 2008, 10:37 pm
United States v. [read post]
4 Sep 2008, 11:36 am
United States v. [read post]
2 Sep 2008, 5:17 pm
State of Tennessee, No. 06-6208 In civil rights suit alleging that city police discriminated against plaintiffs in violation of the Ame [read post]
2 Sep 2008, 2:43 pm
Philip Morris: Topping the list is United States v. [read post]
1 Sep 2008, 3:47 am
United States v. [read post]
29 Aug 2008, 1:25 pm
– Discussion of IPFrontline.com article ‘Understanding Intellectual Property Value’: (IP finance), How to make sure your IP strategy plan is not doomed to failure: (IP Asset Maximizer Blog) Improve venture capital returns with IP portfolio management: (Ezine @rticles) Global - Trade Marks / Domain Names / Brands Trade mark strategy – counterintuitive names: (IP Thinktank), ICANN Intellectual Property Constituency paper on sunrise mechanisms for… [read post]
28 Aug 2008, 3:23 pm
United States v. [read post]
28 Aug 2008, 2:15 pm
Mitchell, No. 02-3505 Denial of a petition for habeas relief in a death penalty case is reversed where: 1) a state court applied the Strickland standard in an objectively unreasonable manner for purposes of claims that petitioner's counsel were ineffective in preparing for the sentencing phase of his trial; 2) the state court unreasonably determined that the alleged errors of trial counsel did not prejudice petitioner's case; and 3) a state court erroneously… [read post]
27 Aug 2008, 6:24 pm
State, 787 S.W.2d 957 (Tex.Crim.App. 1990) Jones v. [read post]
26 Aug 2008, 12:01 pm
See United States v. [read post]
26 Aug 2008, 7:50 am
Constitution that prohibits any religious test for any office under the United States? [read post]
24 Aug 2008, 10:48 am
United States v. [read post]
24 Aug 2008, 9:18 am
United States v. [read post]
18 Aug 2008, 10:28 pm
In Tirado V. [read post]
11 Aug 2008, 1:44 pm
Shaibu, 920 F.2d at 1426 (citing United States v. [read post]
8 Aug 2008, 3:24 pm
Nuvell Credit Company, LLC v. [read post]
