Search for: "Grant v. Parker"
Results 521 - 540
of 731
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Jun 2011, 12:39 am
E.G. v. [read post]
3 Jun 2011, 2:02 pm
From questions about granting and enforcing injunctions after eBay v. [read post]
23 May 2011, 2:20 am
Advising inventors, their spouses, and their start-up companies: James Joyce v Armstrong Teasdale (Patently-O) District Court N D California: Use of patent reexamination evidence in parallel litigation: Volterra Semiconductor Corporation v Primarion Inc (Patents Post-Grant) District Court E D California: Government’s approval of false marking settlement precludes later challenge that settlement was “staged” and therefore lacks preclusive effect: Champion… [read post]
18 May 2011, 1:04 am
In the most recent one, EMI v UPC last October, Mr Justice Peter Charleton decided that he could not grant an injunction restraining UPC from making available to the public sound recordings which infringed copyright. [read post]
14 Apr 2011, 12:58 pm
Hand v. [read post]
11 Apr 2011, 10:00 pm
For the purposes of this judgment, it suffices to say that there is no immigration rule which identifies or defines the circumstances in which a sponsor licence will or may be granted, suspended or withdrawn. [read post]
9 Apr 2011, 2:46 pm
V. [read post]
23 Mar 2011, 12:54 pm
EPA’s program includes funding assistance and state grants. [read post]
17 Mar 2011, 10:15 pm
Parallel Networks v. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 7:44 am
The Court granted cert. in one case, Golan v. [read post]
6 Mar 2011, 7:29 pm
Parker did not grant sanctions until almost seven months after the order dismissing the case by nonsuit was entered.Two issues on appealThe Supreme Court addressed only two issues on appeal. [read post]
4 Mar 2011, 9:11 am
Title: Rast v. [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 1:34 pm
Caldwell (relisted after 2/25 Conference) Docket: 10-622 Issue(s): (1) Whether a binding agreement among multiple states and private companies is immunized from antitrust scrutiny under the state-action immunity doctrine of Parker v. [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 3:40 am
State v. [read post]
25 Feb 2011, 1:26 pm
CaldwellDocket: 10-622Issue(s): (1) Whether a binding agreement among multiple states and private companies is immunized from antitrust scrutiny under the state-action immunity doctrine of Parker v. [read post]
14 Feb 2011, 8:58 am
The defense is that (1) the MSA is not a compact requiring congressional approval under the leading modern case, Parker v. [read post]
13 Feb 2011, 7:56 pm
Parker 2011 U.S. [read post]
7 Feb 2011, 7:38 pm
Morris v. [read post]
6 Feb 2011, 6:42 pm
Court holds the district court didn’t err in holding an evidentiary hearing but did err in granting relief. [read post]
29 Jan 2011, 4:19 pm
Parker (In re Parker), 139 F.3d 668 (9th Cir. 1998). [read post]
