Search for: "State of California v. United States" Results 5341 - 5360 of 13,841
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Nov 2013, 1:54 pm by Ken White
See, e.g., United States v. [read post]
24 Jan 2011, 11:25 am by Tana Fye
”[27]              The United States Supreme Court recognized that the proceeding at issue was a “child custody proceeding” and that the children involved in that proceeding were “Indian children. [read post]
12 Jun 2019, 6:09 am by Florian Mueller
This is the first part of today's little trilogy of FRAND-related posts.In early May, the Antitrust Division of the DOJ, under Qualcomm's former outside counsel and now-Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim, filed an amicus brief with the United States District Court for the Northern District of California more than three months after the FTC v. [read post]
22 Jan 2007, 8:23 am
United States, No. 06-5618 (cert. granted, Nov. 3, 2006); and Rita v. [read post]
2 May 2014, 4:41 am
 In an email Kidde sent inNovember 2010, [he] stated he could no longer work with Bergstein because Bank of America had put him on ChexSystems, which prevented him from opening a bank account anywhere in the United States. [read post]
3 Jul 2012, 11:16 am by Rebecca Tushnet
United Fabricare Supply, Inc. v. 3Hanger Supply Company, Inc., 2012 WL 2449916 (C.D. [read post]
27 Mar 2014, 1:24 pm by Margaret Wood
  The origin of this doctrine was hammered out in a 1908 United States Supreme Court case, Winters v. [read post]
13 Dec 2015, 6:53 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
The most recent affirmative action case before the Supreme Court of the United States is Fisher v. [read post]
12 Aug 2011, 4:34 pm by Brad Pauley
  The purpose of that concurring opinion is to express disagreement with the Ninth Circuit’s “mistaken belief”—stated most recently in United States v. [read post]
14 Oct 2015, 3:12 am by Amy Howe
At the Fed Soc Blog, James Burnham discusses United States v. [read post]
25 Mar 2008, 11:45 am
 The project architect stated that the air conditioners selected by BH were noisier than indoor units but were also less expensive. [read post]
11 Dec 2010, 5:15 am
Robinson, 47 Cal.4th 1104, 1133-1135, cert. denied, 131 S.Ct. 72 (2010) (arrest warrant for thirteen-loci DNA profile, which also offered explanation that profile had random match probability essentially incapable of duplication in human population, complied with particularity requirements of Fourth Amendment to United States Constitution and California Constitution); State v. [read post]
26 Nov 2013, 3:28 pm by Ben Rubin
On November 20, 2013, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California rejected a challenge by various plaintiffs and upheld the biological opinion and incidental take statement issued by the U.S. [read post]