Search for: "USA v. Cross" Results 341 - 360 of 743
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Mar 2010, 6:37 am by Federal and Extradition Defense
This case might be an aberration due to the lack of diplomatic relations with Iran, but an important case for practitioners to review.In USA v Banki, S.D. [read post]
3 Jul 2007, 5:47 am
Examining important issues to be considered by the owners and the licensee, it offers information in a concise and readily accessible format and includes invaluable precedents such as licensing agreements, cross-border licences and a representation agreement. [read post]
14 Apr 2013, 6:32 am
The long-anticipated trial in the case of Diocese of Quincy, et al. v. [read post]
22 Jun 2009, 5:45 pm
Two are of particular interest to us criminal defense types.Melendez-Diaz v. [read post]
30 Jan 2015, 3:47 am by Amy Howe
” In an op-ed for USA Today, Tony Mauro argues that, “on the cause of openness at the court, it is long past due for the tortoise to cross the finish line. [read post]
13 Nov 2019, 3:42 am by Edith Roberts
The first case today is Comcast v. [read post]
7 Dec 2021, 5:01 am by Russell Wheeler
They did so despite Trump’s history of lashing out at judges who crossed him during his 2016 campaign and later. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 5:35 pm by Victoria VanBuren
Armstrong prior to 2005; (3) its exclusive jurisdiction over the drug tests upon which USADA relies including tests in 2001 and 2009–10; (4) its authority to delegate disciplinary responsibility to USA Cycling; (5) its duty to review proposed disciplinary proceedings against its license-holders; (6) its obligation to review the evidence and determine whether it constitutes reliable means of proving an anti-doping violation before any anti-doping charge is brought against Mr. [read post]
4 Dec 2014, 11:05 am by John Elwood
Cisco Systems, Inc., 13-896; while the cross-petition Cisco Systems, Inc. v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 6:12 am
Building Service Employees Health, 789 F.2d at 1377 (9th Cir. 1986) 2 Spinedex Physical Therapy USA Inc. v. [read post]