Search for: "Strong v. United States"
Results 4701 - 4720
of 6,643
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Mar 2010, 8:43 pm
My thanks and congratulations to the Legal Adviser for something that stands as clear opinio juris of the United States. [read post]
5 Aug 2022, 5:01 am
Community for Creative Non-Violence, 466 U.S. 288, 293 (1984) ("[w]e assume for present purposes, but do not decide," whether "overnight sleeping in connection with [a] demonstration is expressive conduct protected to some extent by the First Amendment"), but FAIR appears to have settled it. [2] United States v. [read post]
23 Mar 2022, 8:26 am
What if the servers are not located in the United States but in another country? [read post]
7 Mar 2018, 6:34 am
Google Books case and in Cambridge University Press v. [read post]
2 Jan 2019, 6:21 am
The FTC's trial brief says "MediaTek [...] began supplying CDMA modem chips for use in handsets sold in China in 2015 and for use in handsets sold in the United States in 2016. [read post]
2 Dec 2010, 8:29 pm
As the Court explained in United States v. [read post]
30 Jul 2010, 7:31 pm
However, with the Court’s recent decision in United States v. [read post]
11 Mar 2016, 3:08 pm
If dissatisfied with a refusal, an applicant can appeal the decision to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB” or “Board”) of the United States Patent & Trademark Office (“USPTO”). [read post]
31 Jan 2019, 12:01 am
Not only does the Solicitor General represent the interests of the United States government before the Court, but the office is also charged with assisting the Supreme Court in the exercise of its judicial function. . . . [read post]
13 Feb 2015, 1:47 am
[T]he premise of defendants’ exhaustion defense is that all handsets in the United States are licensed and that the asserted claims contemplate a use of handsets by handset owners/possessors. [read post]
31 Mar 2014, 4:00 am
They see us as strong and successful and confident. [read post]
17 Jun 2021, 9:45 pm
Allen argued that privacy for medical information is still imperative even as norms around health disclosure in the United States shift toward transparency. [read post]
11 Aug 2016, 9:01 pm
Supreme Court’s announcement in New York Times v. [read post]
8 Oct 2008, 11:50 am
A southern state, right? [read post]
4 Apr 2012, 4:20 am
United States, No. 2009-5135 (Fed. [read post]
21 Aug 2022, 9:10 am
For example, a clear statement is needed before a statute is read to interfere with a state's internal governance (Gregory v. [read post]
18 Oct 2007, 7:27 am
"); United States v. [read post]
16 Jun 2009, 11:14 pm
U.S. v. [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 10:27 am
A facial challenge to Act 120 would succeed if a substantial number of its applications are unconstitutional, judged in relation to the statute’s plainly legitimate sweep (United States v. [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 10:27 am
A facial challenge to Act 120 would succeed if a substantial number of its applications are unconstitutional, judged in relation to the statute’s plainly legitimate sweep (United States v. [read post]
