Search for: "DOE v. UNITED STATES" Results 4441 - 4460 of 44,306
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Aug 2022, 4:24 am by Ashley Morgan
The LCD states the following: “Evaluation of the clinical literature indicates that studies comparing the efficacy of CTPs to alternative wound care approaches with patients’ autologous skin are limited in number, apply mainly to generally healthy patients, and examine only a small portion of the CTP products available in the United States. [read post]
11 Aug 2022, 9:14 pm by Ben Allen
 § 851, however, continues, as shown in the Sixth Circuit's opinion in United States v. [read post]
”  The Burbank Police Department’s Internal Affairs Unit initiated an investigation into the physical abuse related to the robbery. [read post]
11 Aug 2022, 10:21 am by becassidy
This comes on the heels of the case decided by the Court in May of this year: United States v. [read post]
11 Aug 2022, 10:07 am by Jo Dale Carothers
The Federal Circuit recently addressed this issue in Thaler v. [read post]
11 Aug 2022, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
And some cases have found some speech to be protected even when it does injure the employer. [read post]
11 Aug 2022, 12:26 am by Florian Mueller
Apple--will be heard by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on Friday, October 21, 2022. [read post]
10 Aug 2022, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar and Jason Mazzone
The federal law was clearly (indeed obviously) unconstitutional under Johnson, and the Supreme Court so held in 1990 in United States v. [read post]
9 Aug 2022, 9:01 pm by Sherry F. Colb
Because SA does not own up to his view that Christianity is the only religion worth protecting, I will state the obvious: the boy could have been a Jew, a Muslim, a Hindu, or a Buddhist and therefore know nothing about Jesus, much like SA knows nothing about how to pronounce “kippah. [read post]
9 Aug 2022, 2:24 pm by Eugene Volokh
Hamilton (10th Cir. 1995) (upholding a Kansas criminal defamation statute as facially valid after interpreting it to require actual malice); see generally United States v. [read post]