Search for: "US v. Love" Results 6241 - 6260 of 9,421
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Jun 2012, 2:35 pm by Rekha Arulanantham
Saenz, president and general counsel of MALDEF, which led the fight in Plyler v. [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 11:51 am
The black box was damaged and may not provide useful data, but the voice recorder was intact. [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 4:34 am by Gritsforbreakfast
Our friends at the Texas Legislature might suggest that new probation and parole programming effectively reduced incarceration levels without harming public safety, and because I supported them, I'd love to give the 2007 reforms credit. [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 4:18 am by SHG
By their decision in Boumediene v. [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 3:32 am by SHG
  Who doesn't love a judge who winks? [read post]
11 Jun 2012, 8:22 pm by Max Kennerly, Esq.
I love writing about lawsuits and I love reading The Oatmeal, so imagine my joy when I heard that The Oatmeal was threatened with “a federal lawsuit! [read post]
10 Jun 2012, 10:56 pm
If you face charges under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), you may want to pay close attention to an en banc decision just handed down by the Ninth Circuit in the case United States v. [read post]
10 Jun 2012, 4:27 pm
 There are still a few spaces left, so come and join us. [read post]
10 Jun 2012, 6:11 am by Max Kennerly, Esq.
I’d love to see the videotape; was the lawyer literally drawing a box, or were their hands carrying an invisible box (simply holding their hands about a foot apart in the air)? [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 1:34 pm by David Harlow
 Please join us at HealthCamp Boston, September 14 - the day before the Medicine 2.0 conference. [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 10:11 am
 Britax Childcare Pty Ltd v Infa-Secure Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 467. [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 3:07 am by Njuguna
 No evidence was tendered to show that Interconsumer had used the mark NICE & LOVELY HERBAL OIL MOISTURIZER to support the Registrar’s finding on honest concurrent use.The Court agreed with the registrar’s finding that the respondent had used the mark NICE and LOVELY since 1st March 1999 and the appellant had not tendered any evidence to show that it had objected to the use of the mark in the last five years. [read post]