Search for: "United States v. Sample"
Results 621 - 640
of 2,002
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Oct 2013, 8:34 pm
See Kinetic Concepts, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Apr 2021, 5:20 pm
Short-form indictments for statutory sex offense and indecent liberties using identical language for each charge and joined for trial were not defective State v. [read post]
1 Apr 2015, 12:13 pm
Williams noted that the United States Supreme Court in Missouri v. [read post]
22 Aug 2008, 11:10 am
Rudnicki v. [read post]
7 Oct 2013, 11:06 am
EmulexAfter a trial and post-trial motions, the United States District Court for the Central District of California de- termined that Emulex Corporation (Emulex) infringed Broadcom Corporation’s (Broadcom) U.S. [read post]
6 Nov 2014, 11:21 am
Following the United States Supreme Court’s determination in Missouri v. [read post]
30 Apr 2021, 9:44 am
State v. [read post]
2 Aug 2015, 9:01 pm
The plaintiffs in Evenwel v. [read post]
14 Sep 2010, 4:30 am
Hayrapetyan v. [read post]
24 May 2007, 6:31 am
United States v. [read post]
20 Aug 2009, 9:10 pm
In my post lauding the Obama Administration for plainly stating, in its latest filing in the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA”) case, that “the United States does not believe that DOMA is rationally related to any legitimate government interests in procreation and child-rearing,” I predicted “eruption of the right-wing volcanos. [read post]
20 Dec 2010, 10:31 am
On Friday, December 17, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision in one of the patentable subject matter cases that was returned to the Court by the Supreme Court in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in Bilski v. [read post]
2 Feb 2022, 9:56 am
Allison Elizabeth Fluke-Ekren, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, 5/15/2019. [read post]
2 Feb 2022, 9:56 am
Allison Elizabeth Fluke-Ekren, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, 5/15/2019. [read post]
7 Feb 2012, 6:39 am
” Courthouse News Service also reports on briefs filed in United States v. [read post]
30 Nov 2020, 9:28 am
In Edwards Lifesciences v. [read post]
30 Nov 2020, 9:28 am
In Edwards Lifesciences v. [read post]
30 Nov 2020, 9:28 am
In Edwards Lifesciences v. [read post]
20 Apr 2014, 4:55 pm
The appeals court pointed out that the DOL’s case would depend on the information received from 150 other state employees who had consented to the disclosure of their identities, and that the state employer already had this information in its possession (Perez v United States District Court, Tacoma, April 18, 2014, Trott, S). [read post]
16 Jan 2012, 4:19 am
Other than this, there are no rules relating to DNA retention at the United States federal level.Whether the DNA that is retained is held as a sample or profile may also be relevant for privacy concerns:? [read post]
