Search for: "United States v. Alter"
Results 4101 - 4120
of 4,638
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Sep 2009, 6:23 am
United States v. [read post]
31 Aug 2009, 12:14 pm
On June 19, 2009, in Zino Davidoff SA v. [read post]
31 Aug 2009, 11:52 am
Tushnet and Yackle, in a study of statutory reform in the United States (available here) look at three kinds of statutes - expressive, instrumental and symbolic. [read post]
30 Aug 2009, 6:15 pm
You can separately subscribe to the IP Think Tank Global Week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com] Highlights this week included: UK government revives downloader cut-off proposal; ISPs object (IPKat) (Excess Copyright) (1709 Copyright Blog) (TorrentFreak) (Ars Technica) CAFC grants Microsoft expedited patent appeal in Word case; Microsoft submits opening brief in appeal: i4i Ltd v Microsoft Corp (IP Watchdog) (Patently-O) (Patently-O) (Washington State… [read post]
26 Aug 2009, 3:39 pm
Concord Pacific Group Inc. v. [read post]
26 Aug 2009, 6:00 am
United States, 406 U.S. 128, 153 (1972). [read post]
20 Aug 2009, 7:36 pm
This Court never has formally addressed the question of whether state court rulings eliminating formerly established property rights can effect a taking, or violate an owner's due process rights, under the United States Constitution. [read post]
20 Aug 2009, 3:57 pm
" United States v. [read post]
19 Aug 2009, 2:03 pm
In Sinaltrainal v. [read post]
19 Aug 2009, 11:46 am
United States, 295 U.S. 78 (1935). [read post]
18 Aug 2009, 7:52 am
Evid. 803(6) and United States v Catabran, 836 F.2d 453, 457 (9th Cir. 1988). [read post]
14 Aug 2009, 8:46 am
District Judge Denny Chin has ruled in Stern v. [read post]
14 Aug 2009, 8:13 am
In the decision under review (Walton County v. [read post]
10 Aug 2009, 5:31 pm
See Exergen, Corp. v. [read post]
7 Aug 2009, 6:37 am
United States v. [read post]
7 Aug 2009, 12:52 am
§ 3600, the district court erred in concluding that two of ten prerequisites for DNA testing were not satisfied (including chain of custody sufficient to ensure the evidence was not altered in a way that would affect DNA testing and that the proposed DNA testing "may produce new material evidence" raising a reasonable probability the defendant did not commit the offense), in United States v. [read post]
6 Aug 2009, 7:11 am
The United States does not recognize these rights, with one very limited exception, and restricts the copyright incentive to economic rewards. [read post]
6 Aug 2009, 6:23 am
United States v. [read post]
6 Aug 2009, 4:00 am
” United States v. [read post]
5 Aug 2009, 10:57 pm
IMCERA Group, Inc., 47 F.3d 47, 52 (2d Cir. 1995)) (alterations in original)); In re Burlington Coat Factory Sec. [read post]
