Search for: "Query v. United States"
Results 501 - 520
of 724
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Jan 2013, 5:41 am
In an interview . . . the victim stated that someone had fraudulently attempted to apply for credit cards online using his name and identifying information and to change his address with the United States Postal Service. . . . [read post]
6 Jan 2013, 3:29 pm
United States v. [read post]
20 Dec 2012, 7:00 am
This, of course, contains a broad set of queries. [read post]
31 Oct 2012, 6:36 am
UnIP (UnIntellectual Property): Trade Secret for Computer Chart File This case is out of my state in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. [read post]
27 Oct 2012, 7:54 pm
See United States v. [read post]
23 Oct 2012, 2:06 pm
Below are observations of the NIMJ volunteer observer at the proceedings in United States v. [read post]
12 Oct 2012, 5:01 am
In June 2012, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California enjoined Samsung's Galaxy Nexus smartphone because it likely infringed Apple's 8,086,604 patent (the "'604 patent") and because Apple was likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction. [read post]
13 Sep 2012, 12:43 pm
State, 2009 WY 17, ¶ 3, 201 P.3d 434, 436 (Wyo. 2009); Harlow v. [read post]
7 Sep 2012, 8:08 am
These cases are teed up to reach the United States Supreme Court in the 2012 Term. [read post]
16 Aug 2012, 8:33 am
A.M. v. [read post]
26 Jul 2012, 6:31 pm
The Commonwealth Court issued a published opinion, Tech One Assoc. v. [read post]
26 Jul 2012, 6:31 pm
The Commonwealth Court issued a published opinion, Tech One Assoc. v. [read post]
3 Jul 2012, 2:11 am
Lord Phillips queries whether, on the facts, there is sufficient control. [read post]
1 Jul 2012, 5:44 pm
Both decisions give teeth and expanded reach to the often-cited principle that the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires that federal agencies provide “fair warning” or “fair notice” of required or prohibited conduct. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 10:21 pm
It seems that he was wrong on that account too, at least according to the majority of the United State Supreme Court. [read post]
24 Jun 2012, 10:30 pm
This was - and is - the promise of the Confrontation Clause.For the last several years, the Supreme Court of the United States has reflected upon the meaning of confrontation without much resolution. [read post]
20 Jun 2012, 2:01 pm
Sutton, and United States District Judge James L. [read post]
19 Jun 2012, 2:55 am
Technical College System of Georgia v. [read post]
16 Jun 2012, 10:40 am
In a controversial decision, Marx v. [read post]
30 May 2012, 6:56 pm
Noerr Motor Freight, Inc., 365 U.S. 127 (1961); United Mine Workers v. [read post]
