Search for: "U. S. v. Guess" Results 41 - 60 of 397
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Jun 2022, 4:26 pm by INFORRM
” A person’s voice can allow machine learning to guess a person’s age, gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic status and more. [read post]
16 Apr 2022, 2:49 pm by Dennis Crouch
See Note, Subtests of “Nonobviousness”: A Nontechnical Approach to Patent Validity, 112 U. [read post]
28 Mar 2022, 7:30 am by Public Employment Law Press
The State's immunity waiver applies equally to its municipal subdivisions, including cities (see Valdez v City of New York, 18 NY3d 69, 75 [2011]; Florence v Goldberg, 44 NY2d 189, 195 [1978]). [read post]
28 Mar 2022, 7:30 am by Public Employment Law Press
The State's immunity waiver applies equally to its municipal subdivisions, including cities (see Valdez v City of New York, 18 NY3d 69, 75 [2011]; Florence v Goldberg, 44 NY2d 189, 195 [1978]). [read post]
8 Mar 2022, 4:00 am by SHG
Ultimately, the Supreme Court’s ruling in Wooden v. [read post]
1 Feb 2022, 1:21 am by Joe Mullin
In this episode, you’ll learn about: The prior art, or evidence, of earlier technology that EFF was able to present to courts to prove that the so-called “podcasting patent” was invalid How the landmark Alice v. [read post]
27 Jan 2022, 9:49 am by Eric Goldman
Adam Kovacevich has dubbed this dynamic “The Prager Effect,” in honor of Prager Us effort to censorially weaponize the PruneYard case that instead validated YouTube’s editorial rights. [read post]
20 Jan 2022, 12:04 pm by Elizabeth McElvein, Benjamin Wittes
Circuit action has taken place in the case of Trump v. [read post]
18 Nov 2021, 8:03 am by Michael Stern
” The court explained that Biden was not constitutionally obligated to honor Trump’s assertion of executive privilege and it would be inappropriate for the court “to intrude upon the executive function” by second guessing Biden’s determination of executive branch interests in the matter. [read post]
22 Sep 2021, 9:27 am by Joel R. Brandes
Giving due deference to the court’s credibility determinations it concluded that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s request for attorney’s fees. [read post]