Search for: "US v. Givens" Results 6221 - 6240 of 51,324
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Apr 2020, 2:51 pm
Torres used his self-represented status to improperly cross-examine the victim, or to finagle a visit with her in the guise of interviewing her, or used special privileges given to self-represented litigants to contact her, or employed a court-appointed investigator to contact her. [read post]
27 Nov 2007, 5:25 am
To view a copy of the Appellate Division’s decision, please use this link: Watanabe v. [read post]
12 Nov 2023, 2:35 am by centerforartlaw
”[10] In the case of the allegations by Viktor, the defendants would have had a harder time disproving their copying given that they were clearly aware of the existence of her work and had even expressed a desire for its use in the video. [read post]
26 Aug 2015, 9:06 am by Eric Goldman
The Ninth Circuit was also briefed on allegedly infringing trademark use that included a Twitter hashtag in Webceleb v. [read post]
15 Feb 2014, 1:49 pm by Neil Siegel
Supreme Court’s opinion in United States v. [read post]
4 Dec 2008, 1:25 pm
To download a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use this link: People v. [read post]
29 May 2009, 9:00 am
For a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use this link: Matter of Gazzara v. [read post]
3 Apr 2016, 7:01 pm
 James highlighted the case of DuPont v Kolon - which concerned the Kevlar trade secrets (read about the case here in the testimony from Karen Cochran) - and recent cases concerning Chinese espionage (US v Xu and Zi, US v Xi and US v Chen) as examples of criminal trade secrets prosecution. [read post]
22 Aug 2011, 5:27 pm by Venkat
It seems especially odd that courts have been so deferential on consent issues given the inherent disagreeability of NebuAd's DPI practices. 3) Along with last week's Bose v. [read post]
20 Nov 2018, 11:06 pm by Roel van Woudenberg
An example is given of a situation in which it might be not clear which of the reasons given by the Examining Division in its communications might be essential to the decision to refuse, and it is stated that in that situation a fully reasoned decision should be issued instead (see C-V, 15.3 "Issuing a self-contained decision").2.2 In the present case, the applicant submi [read post]
24 Mar 2012, 9:55 am by admin
Given all of these examples, one may wonder if this could ever be stopped since there is no limit to how people may use the internet. [read post]