Search for: "State v. Merchandise Seized"
Results 41 - 60
of 92
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Sep 2007, 11:13 am
The preview of Gilles v. [read post]
6 Jul 2017, 6:18 pm
Failure to comply with the settlement terms could cost Hobby Lobby $2,000 per day.The forfeiture complaint—docketed in the Eastern District of New York as United States v. [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 1:59 am
The case is Obama for America v. [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 1:44 pm
* Kim v. [read post]
23 Jan 2018, 4:34 am
Swedish Supreme Court confirms that domain names constitute property that can be seized by the stateThe Swedish Supreme Court has determined that domain names (‘ThePirateBay.se’ and ‘PirateBay.se’ in given case) must be viewed as a form of property and thus could be seized by the state when used as “tools” to aid and abet copyright infringement. [read post]
2 May 2011, 6:00 am
On October 18, 2007, the justice court heard arguments regarding whether the seized equipment should be returned to the Moores following the State's dismissal of the criminal charges. [read post]
8 May 2014, 2:50 pm
Jonathan Markell and U.S. v. [read post]
3 Dec 2019, 10:00 am
United States, 505 U.S. 647 (1992). [read post]
17 Jul 2008, 1:03 am
See Litecubes, LLC v. [read post]
8 Nov 2011, 9:01 pm
The case is captioned and docketed as United States of America v. [read post]
19 Jun 2014, 10:00 am
In Blackhorse v. [read post]
20 Jan 2021, 6:00 am
United States .v Schultz, 333 F.3d 393 (2nd Cir. 2003); United States v. [read post]
9 May 2024, 2:41 pm
S. 555 (1983), and United States v. [read post]
29 Jan 2018, 2:57 am
The French court of appeal cancelled the French marks and assigned the name domain « France.com » to the State of France. [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 8:12 am
GPX International Tire Corporation et. al. v. [read post]
10 Jul 2017, 3:00 pm
The case of United States v. [read post]
14 Nov 2014, 3:13 am
Garcia v. [read post]
15 Oct 2020, 2:17 pm
In the case of United States v. [read post]
15 Oct 2020, 2:17 pm
In the case of United States v. [read post]
18 Jul 2011, 2:56 pm
The agent also stated that lying about the country of origin on customs documents constitutes a material false statement in violation of the federal criminal code, citing United States v. [read post]
