Search for: "Judge v. United States"
Results 6321 - 6340
of 35,340
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Jul 2008, 1:55 pm
[This case summarized by Ahmed Soliman, legal intern, Federal & Community Defender for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.]In United States v. [read post]
28 Feb 2007, 5:55 pm
United States v. [read post]
20 Sep 2007, 12:02 pm
United States, 996 F.2d 1121, 1125 n.3 (11th Cir. 1993); Crimm v. [read post]
8 Apr 2015, 2:11 pm
United States v. [read post]
8 Apr 2008, 4:43 pm
Clinton, 48 M.J. 84 (C.A.A.F. 1998), and United States v. [read post]
27 Dec 2011, 3:33 am
Otherwise, chances are pretty good that they will believe that you ruined their chances of "justice" by failing to raise that winner point, the one you left on the table.But try to cover them all and you can anticipate some snarky judge to write what Third Circuit Judge Aldisert did in United States v. [read post]
7 May 2019, 2:25 pm
May 6, 2019), the Court granted Defendant’s motion to transfer the patent infringement action to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas pursuant to 28 U.S.C. [read post]
28 Aug 2012, 10:35 am
United States, No. 11-597 (Aug. 27, 2012) [read post]
10 Apr 2015, 9:16 pm
The patent is United States Patent No. 6,992,218 (“the ’218 patent”), assigned to SCR Pharmatop. [read post]
20 Apr 2009, 5:55 am
The United States filed an amicus brief at the meri [read post]
25 Aug 2019, 2:28 pm
Tillett retained the right to use the KROMA mark in the United States. [read post]
7 Jul 2018, 8:07 pm
" Edrei v. [read post]
5 Aug 2022, 10:08 am
From Thaler v. [read post]
7 Jan 2019, 2:34 pm
See United States v. [read post]
19 Jan 2015, 9:20 am
United States v. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 2:10 pm
Yesterday the United States Supreme Court issued a long-anticipated decision in City of Ontario v. [read post]
12 Aug 2015, 1:41 am
In United States v. [read post]
1 Mar 2018, 7:03 am
”) State v. [read post]
27 Mar 2012, 1:40 pm
United States v. [read post]
22 Feb 2011, 6:55 am
” In today’s second case, United States v. [read post]