Search for: "German v. State" Results 581 - 600 of 3,581
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Jun 2012, 5:09 pm by Elijah Yip
  The plaintiff in Garruto v. [read post]
13 Jan 2008, 6:36 am
To take the best-known precedent, after World War II the United States prosecuted German government lawyers in the second round of Nuremberg trials. [read post]
20 Aug 2013, 9:50 am by Sandy Levinson
  Whether this would have been good for the United States is certainly debatable. [read post]
9 Dec 2018, 8:33 am by Venkat Balasubramani
The court says neither fact is germane to whether the virtual coins are a thing of value. [read post]
4 Apr 2013, 6:34 pm by Bart Torvik
You might have thought the case, United States v. [read post]
12 Oct 2022, 10:20 am by Florian Mueller
Against that backdrop, the Munich court's stance on the prematurity of such motions to dismiss is even easier to understand.In other Ericsson v. [read post]
5 Jul 2017, 11:34 am
Patrick Huston, which “organizes, analyzes and synthesizes all of the 48 UTSA-adopting states’ published court opinions (state and federal). [read post]
1 Jan 2013, 11:51 pm by Gilles Cuniberti
In 2011, Mrs Szyrocka, a Polish resident, applied to a Polish court for a European order for payment to be issued against SiGer Technologie Gmbh, a German based company. [read post]
11 Apr 2019, 3:16 am by Florian Mueller
And I learned that just on Tuesday the court lifted the competition law-based injunction, but hasn't stated the reasons yet.That one is a sideshow (deceptive advertising) of a sideshow (a fake patent injunction that had no serious impact), while the one that really matters is the Apple, Foxconn et al. v. [read post]
12 Jun 2014, 10:59 pm by INFORRM
A further article appeared simultaneously in the German weekly magazine Bunte (Prince Albert’s claim in relation to this article failed before the German courts). [read post]
16 Nov 2020, 5:14 am by Anna Carrier (BE)
On 13 November 2020, the German Presidency of the Council hosted a meeting of a working party on financial services, the agenda of which focused on a review of the specific provisions of Title II (crypto-assets other than asset-referenced tokens or e-money tokens), Title V (Authorisation and operating conditions for crypto-asset service providers) and Title VI (prevention of market abuse involving crypto-assets). [read post]