Search for: "State v. Holderness"
Results 461 - 480
of 7,259
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Oct 2011, 6:53 am
Holder and Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. [read post]
27 Aug 2015, 4:00 am
In Miller v. [read post]
17 Sep 2020, 3:39 pm
We are happy to report that the Department of State has released an important announcement that describes the agency’s compliance with the recent court ruling, Gomez v. [read post]
24 Sep 2009, 9:47 am
Holder. [read post]
27 Apr 2009, 3:00 am
Holder (08-495), on a challenge to banishment after felony conviction. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 12:29 pm
Holder, No. 10-545 (U.S. [read post]
29 Mar 2022, 9:01 pm
It is regarded as one of the world's major 5G SEP holders. [read post]
25 Jul 2020, 9:00 am
In National Fuel Gas Supply Corp. v. [read post]
27 Apr 2010, 6:10 am
In Fuji Photo Film Co. v. [read post]
22 Apr 2021, 10:46 am
§1254a(f)(4), which states, “for purposes of adjustment of status … [the TPS holder] shall be considered as being in, and maintaining, lawful status as a nonimmigrant. [read post]
22 Nov 2022, 3:17 pm
From a decision today by Judge John Sinatra (W.D.N.Y.) in Christian v. [read post]
3 Jul 2010, 1:21 am
In Purcell v Ireland, the Commission (in an admissibility decision) upheld a reporting ban on Sinn Fein accepting – as with the majority in Holder - apparently somewhat speculative justifications for the ban. [read post]
7 Sep 2012, 1:16 am
On the 4 July 2012 the Supreme Court had a further hearing in the case of O’Brien v Ministry of Justice. [read post]
6 Feb 2014, 8:04 am
must be interpreted as meaning that the holder of an intellectual property right over goods sold to a person residing in the territory of a Member State through an online sales website in a non-member country enjoys the protection afforded to that holder by that regulation at the time when those goods enter the territory of that Member State merely by virtue of the acquisition of those goods. [read post]
20 Sep 2010, 1:29 pm
By: Jason Rantanen Fujitsu Ltd. v. [read post]
2 Jan 2015, 12:28 pm
In Moncrieffe v. [read post]
23 Aug 2013, 5:00 am
Per 13A-12-211, any unlawful distribution of a controlled substance of Schedules I through V is considered a Class B felony. [read post]
17 Feb 2023, 6:31 am
In Impression Products v. [read post]
13 Feb 2011, 6:11 pm
Restivo v. [read post]
28 Jul 2023, 9:48 am
Two SEP holders have recently been awarded royalties by the High Court that fell far short of their demands (InterDigital v. [read post]
