Search for: "MATTER OF F B"
Results 401 - 420
of 9,082
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Aug 2013, 10:02 pm
., 476 F.3d 1261, 1267 (11th Cir. 2007). [read post]
19 Mar 2011, 7:02 am
., 517 F.3d 1284, 1290 (Fed. [read post]
2 Jan 2023, 3:03 pm
UnumProvident Corp., 464 F.3d 1260, 1272 (11th Cir. 2006) (“Under § 1292(b), appellate review, even for certified questions, is discretionary . . . . [read post]
8 Apr 2014, 3:00 am
Nationwide Property and Casualty Insurance Co., 505 F.3d 401 (6th Cir. 2007), the Sixth Circuit held that a disclaimer in a complaint, regarding the amount of recoverable damages, does not preclude a defendant from removing the matter to federal court upon a demonstration that damages are more likely than not to meet the amount in controversy requirement. [read post]
4 Apr 2013, 11:20 pm
Nokia takes no position on any of the other substantive issues on appeal in this matter." [read post]
2 Dec 2022, 11:03 am
The California Supreme Court granted review and transferred the matter back to the Court of Appeal with directions to “issue an opinion that addresses which constitutional provision governs the denial of bail in noncapital cases—article I, section 12, subdivisions (b) and (c), or article I, section 28, subdivision (f)(3), of the California Constitution — or, in the alternative, whether these provisions can be reconciled. [read post]
5 Nov 2018, 6:22 am
§ 102(b)3 is a legal conclusion based onunderlying factual determinations. [read post]
13 Sep 2018, 10:27 am
The parties dispute whether the ABT Catalog qualifiesas a “printed publication” under pre-AIA § 102(b).Whether a reference qualifies as a “printed publication” isa legal conclusion based on underlying factual findings.Jazz Pharm., 895 F.3d at 1356. [read post]
23 Nov 2020, 1:58 pm
Electric Co, 35 F. [read post]
16 Aug 2006, 6:12 am
AOL Time Warner Inc., 452 F.3d 1040, 1042 (9th Cir. 2006). [read post]
16 Nov 2023, 12:15 am
Express Co., 458 F.3d 942, 952 (9th Cir. 2006) (citation omitted). [read post]
17 Aug 2023, 5:01 am
MHLS has focused on Robert F. [read post]
6 Feb 2013, 12:00 am
’” 386 F.3d 1133, 1138 (Fed. [read post]
24 Oct 2019, 4:29 pm
§1881a(f)(1)(B), to keep records of each U.S. [read post]
6 Apr 2013, 3:03 pm
Under Rule 41(a)(1)(B), “[i]f the plaintiff files a second notice of dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1), the Court must dismiss an action based on or including the same claim with prejudice. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 5:04 am
§ 216(b). [read post]
15 Feb 2008, 5:03 am
Excel Communications, Inc., 172 F.3d 1352 (Fed. [read post]
4 Feb 2015, 3:56 pm
735 F.3d 1158 (9th Cir. 2013). [read post]
3 Aug 2011, 1:24 pm
In any case, the Kat struggles to think of what patent related matters could be enacted on the other side of an actual pond that would: (a) be sufficiently important to grace the pages of this blog; and (b) have come to the Kat’s attention in any case. [read post]
13 Oct 2023, 9:35 am
These statements give me a buffet of uncontested facts from which to draw without the necessity of reconciling the version of events provided by Party A with those provided by Party B. [read post]
