Search for: "United States v. American Oil Company" Results 341 - 360 of 572
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Jul 2013, 10:18 am by Rodger Citron
  (The defendants were a British oil company, a Dutch oil company, and their Nigerian subsidiary.) [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 12:14 am by Mischa Popoff
” Book sits in a chair that was once occupied by none other than Miles V. [read post]
17 Apr 2013, 3:09 pm by Ryan Scoville
How often do violations of customary international law occur within the United States? [read post]
14 Feb 2013, 8:17 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
And companies partner with us to set up new businesses on reservations. [read post]
11 Jan 2013, 7:25 am by Eric
 First, all governments are pro-censorship, and that certainly includes the United States. [read post]
24 Dec 2012, 9:30 pm by RegBlog
With the regulatory stories of 2012 coming to an end, RegBlog would like to take this opportunity to reflect back on what has been a year of significant regulatory developments in the United States and throughout the world. [read post]
14 Nov 2012, 5:00 am by Lisa Salazar
Specifically K-V wants a ban on the importation of all 17 HPC “except as authorized by [K-V]” and to prevent the sale or solicitation of 17 HPC within the United States from any imported source unless authorized by K-V. [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 7:44 am by John Elwood
United States, 12-5271, for yesterday’s grant in McQuiggin v. [read post]
24 Sep 2012, 1:17 pm by WIMS
Appealed from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. [read post]
22 Aug 2012, 10:49 am
So, clearly, Russia's WTO accession is an economic no-brainer for the United States. [read post]
16 Aug 2012, 7:10 am by Walter James
  In July 2011, according to the government, the United States Coast Guard conducted a Port State Controlexamination on the Fishing Vessel (F/V) San Nikunau, when the vessel entered port in Pago Pago, American Samoa. [read post]
14 Aug 2012, 7:52 pm by John Bellinger
  For example, even if the Court decides that the ATS does not apply to violations of international law in other countries, unless the Court is clear about which extraterritorial acts are covered and which are not, ATS plaintiffs will bring new cases alleging that U.S. persons or companies have committed tortious acts inside the United States by planning, or failing to stop, actions outside the United States. [read post]