Search for: "MARCUS v. STATE"
Results 361 - 380
of 759
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Apr 2016, 8:03 am
In Remijas v. [read post]
11 Apr 2019, 3:16 am
Marcus Grosch, is really an amazing patent litigator--had fought very hard to win anything in Germany. [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 3:06 am
” [Posner, chief judge, in People Who Care v. [read post]
27 Jun 2008, 8:38 am
Marcu, receiver-appellee
U.S. [read post]
19 Mar 2010, 5:28 am
State v. [read post]
18 Apr 2012, 5:36 am
State v. [read post]
10 Nov 2013, 9:09 pm
The Supreme Court, in the case of Burrage v. [read post]
2 May 2008, 10:05 am
., Edmunds, reversed the Eastern District of Tennessee's denial of a motion to suppress and vacated a defendant's sentence on a firearms offense in United States v. [read post]
25 Jan 2010, 8:51 pm
The only notable lower court decision is State v. [read post]
1 Jul 2010, 8:21 am
The ruling in Warren Lee Hill, Jr. v. [read post]
20 Dec 2018, 5:53 am
Marcus Grosch. [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 4:44 am
The decision in Speech First v. [read post]
31 Dec 2022, 3:12 pm
But in United States v. [read post]
6 Aug 2017, 3:18 pm
In May 2, 2017, in the Whelan v. [read post]
16 Feb 2015, 12:03 pm
Perhaps Marcus thinks Congress is shirking because she thinks it should be on the record one way or the other with respect to the Islamic State. [read post]
8 Mar 2022, 8:55 pm
This comprehensive guide by Marcus P. [read post]
12 Aug 2011, 10:30 am
” United States v. [read post]
3 Dec 2021, 7:13 am
The Fact That X States Failed To Criminalize An Act in 1868 Does Not Mean That Committing The Act Is A Fundamental Right Chemerinsky: Republican Justices Are "Partisan Hacks" SG Argues There Is No Middle Path in Dobbs Ruth Marcus Joins The Brett Kavanaugh Fan Fiction Club Can Cooper v. [read post]
14 Aug 2015, 1:12 pm
[v] Marcus, David and Shawn Leppo, “Welcome Fallout from the Smartphone Wars: Federal Circuit embraces strong protection of design patents. [read post]
11 Mar 2008, 8:46 am
Mitchell, No. 06-516 Conviction for aggravated identity theft is reversed where defendant did not couple his use of the name "Marcus Jackson" a sufficient amount of correct, distinguishing information to identify a specific Marcus Jackson, as required by the statute. [read post]
