Search for: "U.S. v. Sweet*"
Results 441 - 460
of 662
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Dec 2022, 10:52 pm
U.S. legislation would not be a requirement for any of the foregoing to do away with the App Store monoppoly, but would definitely pave the way. [read post]
28 Dec 2017, 5:37 am
We've highlighted new laws and legal procedures (Electronic Filing in U.S. [read post]
8 Jan 2013, 9:39 am
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., 2013 U.S. [read post]
5 Jan 2023, 10:44 pm
The defenses, however, were the same, and will again be identical.I took note of the constitutional challenges and may have been the only commentator so far to put them into the context of the Axon Enterprise, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Mar 2014, 7:00 am
Recently, in Aaron v. [read post]
18 Dec 2021, 9:54 am
This limitation is constitutionally mandated, separating our branch from our political co-branches. '[F]ederal judges—who have no constituency—have a duty to respect legitimate policy choices made by those who do.' [quoting Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. [read post]
15 Oct 2014, 11:58 am
In Giffen v. [read post]
26 May 2017, 4:17 am
“Saying It’s So, Doesn’t Make It So”—Independent Contractor v. [read post]
12 Nov 2019, 7:26 am
Several pre-selected opinions (Loving v. [read post]
8 Jan 2024, 6:08 am
Referring to the overturning of Roe v. [read post]
21 Apr 2014, 12:23 pm
Well, if plaintiffs in Thornton v. [read post]
30 Jun 2014, 5:38 am
[Yes]Lack of Bona Fide Intent:Precedential No. 13: Lack of Bona Fide Intent Dooms Two "FUTURE" Applications, Says TTABOwnership: Precedential No. 16: TTAB Orders Cancellation of Registration - Applicant not Owner of Underlying Foreign RegistrationSpecimen of Use: Test Your TTAB Judge-Ability On These Two Mutilation Cases Non-use:Affirming Refusal, TTAB Says "HOURS OF ENERGY NOW" Not Being Used as a TrademarkCancellation Under Section 14(3):Precedential No. 19: TTAB Grants… [read post]
11 Jan 2013, 7:41 pm
In a federal case I testified in recently (US v Simmons), the defendant's compliance with the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act was material in the case because in the application for search warrant, the DEA agent referenced the Ogden & Cole memos (which describe the U.S. [read post]
1 Mar 2016, 1:32 pm
The opinion in Kwasniewski v. [read post]
26 May 2017, 4:17 am
“Saying It’s So, Doesn’t Make It So”—Independent Contractor v. [read post]
23 Feb 2011, 6:19 am
In a similar matter, U.S. v. [read post]
10 Apr 2017, 12:18 pm
These trademarks have been registered with the U.S. [read post]
30 Aug 2010, 7:44 am
State, ___ U.S. ___, 130 S.Ct. 721 (2010) (Sixth Amendment right applies to jury selection process). [read post]
23 May 2014, 4:23 pm
Petrella v. [read post]
20 Jun 2012, 9:12 am
District Court in Manhattan, Stinson v. [read post]
