Search for: "State v. Holder"
Results 3541 - 3560
of 8,247
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Apr 2015, 8:10 am
" Holder, 392 F.3d at 1020. [read post]
17 Apr 2015, 1:31 am
However, as was stated by Paul Sieminski, Chief Legal Counsel for Automattic: "... [read post]
17 Apr 2015, 12:39 am
The decision in in the 'Jersey Boys' case which has been covered by this blog here and here: Corbello v. [read post]
16 Apr 2015, 9:30 pm
While acknowledging the success of the law in greatly increasing the number of African-American and Latino elected officials, Chief Justice John Roberts contended in his majority opinion in Shelby County v. [read post]
16 Apr 2015, 11:15 am
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued an opinion in Glik v. [read post]
15 Apr 2015, 7:15 pm
Holder 14-1096Issue: Whether a state offense constitutes an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. [read post]
15 Apr 2015, 12:40 am
The trade mark holder hopes that consumers will use the products identified by the mark, including the hashtag slogan; he can build upon the hashtag slogan to redirect users to the company’s website and social networks, where their brand allegiance can be reinforced. [read post]
14 Apr 2015, 1:31 pm
The Fourth Circuit in United States v. [read post]
14 Apr 2015, 9:50 am
Photo credit: 3D Quick Link Crossword // ShutterStock Trademarks and Domain Names * TheDomains: .Sucks Releases Pricing With “Premiums” For Trademark Holders Up To $2,499 A Year. [read post]
13 Apr 2015, 6:03 am
Binion v. [read post]
11 Apr 2015, 9:59 am
Crime * WaPo: Holder limits seized-asset sharing process that split billions with local, state police. [read post]
10 Apr 2015, 4:26 pm
” Mary Kay, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Apr 2015, 4:00 am
Judges Nathan and Netburn also disagreed with Escape's argument that pre-1972 sound recordings should be excluded, with Judge Nathan citing the recent decision in Flo & Eddie, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Apr 2015, 9:47 am
Since the Klass and others v. [read post]
7 Apr 2015, 4:31 am
Canton v. [read post]
7 Apr 2015, 1:26 am
The aim of the Directive is to harmonize copyright within the EU, but does not, as was seen by the Court, "...prevent or remove any differences between the national legislations as regards the extent of the protection which the Member States may grant to the holders of the rights referred to in Article 3[] with regard to certain acts, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, which are not expressly referred to in that provision".Following their argument the Court… [read post]
6 Apr 2015, 12:11 pm
However, it does seem that the ISP will be required to send at least two letters to subscribers that are identified by the music rights-holders as infringing copyright via the ISP’s network. [read post]
4 Apr 2015, 6:36 am
In the case of GEICO v. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 4:20 am
Preska, Chief United States District Court Judge for the Southern District of New York, rule [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 1:01 pm
Citizens v. [read post]
