Search for: "United States v. Doles"
Results 41 - 60
of 247
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 May 2017, 3:30 am
In Dole v. [read post]
20 Jan 2023, 5:16 am
And in the Flatow case, known as Flatow v. [read post]
3 Apr 2018, 5:53 am
Moreover, under United States v. [read post]
10 Apr 2012, 10:58 am
”Here is the full opinion of the court: United States v. [read post]
12 Sep 2019, 1:02 pm
Under Title III of that act, United States citizens who had their property confiscated by the Castro regime were given the right to file suit against those who traffic in such properties (See Libertad Act §§ 301-306). [read post]
9 Feb 2011, 7:47 am
" NIH in the 21st Century: the Director's Perspective, Testimony before the Subcommittee on Health Committee on Energy and Commerce United States House of Representatives, 17 (June 15, 2010) (Francis S. [read post]
9 Feb 2011, 7:47 am
" NIH in the 21st Century: the Director's Perspective, Testimony before the Subcommittee on Health Committee on Energy and Commerce United States House of Representatives, 17 (June 15, 2010) (Francis S. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 1:38 pm
United States v. [read post]
12 Dec 2013, 8:01 am
United States v. [read post]
8 Oct 2009, 9:12 am
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit will visit Honolulu, Hawaii, next week for a semi-annual sitting. [read post]
12 Nov 2010, 9:22 pm
This new interpretation is supported by United States v. [read post]
12 Dec 2010, 7:42 am
Now we need new hands to help carry the message of how valuable Bayh-Dole is to the continued health and wealth of the United States. [read post]
15 Dec 2009, 3:27 pm
” Even more intriguing is that, although he did this sensitive work within the United States, there was nothing in the record showing that the United States government was aware of his activities, and he had no diplomatic or other official credentials. [read post]
6 Feb 2007, 10:05 am
Microsoft v. [read post]
9 Feb 2023, 2:44 pm
§§ 1332(a)(4), 1603(a), (b)(2); Dole Food Co. v. [read post]
15 Dec 2010, 5:45 am
In Stanford v. [read post]
6 Jun 2011, 11:27 am
United States, the Court affirmed the decision of the Fourth Circuit, holding that a federal sentencing court must determine whether an “offense under State law” is a “serious drug offense” by consulting the “maximum term of imprisonment” applicable to a defendant’s prior state drug offense at the time of the defendant’s conviction for that offense, rather than current state law, because the maximum sentence… [read post]
26 Nov 2007, 7:44 pm
Therefore, the case was transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. [read post]
9 Jun 2011, 9:21 am
United States, United States v. [read post]
26 Jan 2010, 7:51 am
The defendant in United States v. [read post]
