Search for: "United States v. Caronia"
Results 21 - 40
of 61
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Mar 2016, 1:34 pm
The parties’ March 8, 2016 proposed order of settlement includes the following provisions: Defendants agree to be bound by the Court’s conclusion that Amarin may engage in truthful and non-misleading speech promoting the off-label use of Vascepa and, under United States v. [read post]
14 Oct 2014, 5:30 am
For example, the court in United States v. [read post]
11 Sep 2015, 10:55 am
Whether Judge Ronnie Abrams will follow suit, of course, remains to be seen, but Pacira has Second Circuit precedent—United States v. [read post]
1 Sep 2015, 4:46 am
Ct. 2653 (2011), protecting promotional communications as commercial speech; next, the Second Circuit in United States v. [read post]
21 Sep 2011, 1:43 pm
United States v. [read post]
11 Jun 2015, 2:11 pm
The Caronia Effect For this reason, many observers saw the December 2012 decision in United States v. [read post]
17 Mar 2016, 6:09 am
Supp. 3d 196 (S.D.N.Y. 2015) – to the extent that’s even possible under United States v. [read post]
5 Feb 2013, 11:32 am
The legal community is still buzzing about the Second Circuit’s decision in United States v. [read post]
28 Dec 2012, 1:57 pm
United States v. [read post]
2 Aug 2012, 10:44 am
The Stolen Valor case, United States v. [read post]
8 Apr 2014, 10:17 am
United States v. [read post]
7 May 2010, 11:13 am
And if you haven’t been reading us for a while (or just want a refresher), click on the “First Amendment” link to the right (or at the end of this post) and you’ll see our collection of Greatest Hits on the topic – some short and some long (hey, we warned you, we can get worked up about free speech).One of those posts was about United States v. [read post]
10 Aug 2015, 8:15 am
Although the Second Circuit’s December 2012 decision in United States v. [read post]
7 Jan 2016, 1:52 pm
"Judge Callahan holds, however, that there's precisely such “clearly irreconcilable” intervening authority: Sorrell v. [read post]
30 Oct 2015, 10:24 am
Ohio or Roe v. [read post]
15 Nov 2013, 11:34 am
United States v. [read post]
2 Sep 2010, 1:16 pm
See United States v. [read post]
27 Aug 2015, 5:01 am
Public Service Commission, is a “a substantial interest to be achieved by restrictions on commercial speech,” 447 U.S. 557, 564 (1980), we’re certain that mining the government’s briefs in prior First Amendment litigation such as United States v. [read post]
15 Oct 2008, 9:03 pm
One of these items is United States v. [read post]
2 Nov 2012, 11:58 am
” United States ex rel. [read post]
