Search for: "THOMAS V DEFENSE"
Results 3781 - 3800
of 4,571
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jan 2022, 12:35 pm
At that time, four justices – Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh – noted that they concurred in the decision to deny review because the factual record was too undeveloped to grant preliminary relief to the coach, emphasizing that they did not “necessarily agree with the decision (much less the opinion) below. [read post]
23 Mar 2020, 1:02 pm
Indeed, the leading trademark scholar Professor Thomas McCarthy agrees that, despite the dicta of footnote 7 in New Kids, there is no per se rule against the nominative fair use of others’ logos, making context key to the fair use defense: “For example, most people would agree that a business magazine or web site illustration could properly use the logos of companies whose economic performance is being discussed. [read post]
27 Apr 2017, 7:58 am
Justices Thomas and Ginsburg wrote separate brief opinions concurring in the judgment (Lewis v. [read post]
26 Jun 2022, 3:25 am
State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. [read post]
15 Oct 2011, 7:13 am
Yet another case: U.S. v. [read post]
2 Nov 2010, 4:22 am
See generally Miranda v. [read post]
3 Aug 2023, 12:56 pm
United States v. [read post]
12 Jul 2021, 8:45 am
This argument has been tried and failed numerous times, most recently in Children’s Health Defense v. [read post]
9 May 2019, 4:00 am
The purpose of a reply is to respond to new material or affirmative defenses set forth in an answer (8 NYCRR §§275.3 and 275.14). [read post]
9 May 2019, 4:00 am
The purpose of a reply is to respond to new material or affirmative defenses set forth in an answer (8 NYCRR §§275.3 and 275.14). [read post]
9 May 2019, 4:00 am
The purpose of a reply is to respond to new material or affirmative defenses set forth in an answer (8 NYCRR §§275.3 and 275.14). [read post]
9 May 2019, 4:00 am
The purpose of a reply is to respond to new material or affirmative defenses set forth in an answer (8 NYCRR §§275.3 and 275.14). [read post]
8 Apr 2021, 9:52 am
Google LLC v. [read post]
3 Jun 2023, 10:45 am
Nonetheless, this law, Judge Thomas Parker (W.D. [read post]
21 Mar 2018, 1:39 pm
Justice Clarence Thomas has filed a dissent, joined by Alito. [read post]
1 Aug 2012, 11:11 am
Thomas conc. [read post]
27 Jun 2024, 9:29 am
And Justice Thomas agreed with both of their claims. [read post]
30 Jun 2013, 9:01 pm
In United States v. [read post]
3 Oct 2011, 9:27 am
Howes v. [read post]