Search for: "US v. Rose"
Results 661 - 680
of 2,375
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jun 2011, 5:49 am
This has a useful divorce device as well. [read post]
24 May 2022, 5:01 am
After a slight dip in CY 2020, the number of targets rose again in CY 2021 to 232,432—the largest number since the ODNI began reporting § 702 targeting statistics in 2014 (Table 4). [read post]
11 Feb 2019, 2:03 pm
Source Perrier v. [read post]
27 May 2016, 3:48 am
Minn. 1991) where the plaintiff successfully claimed for use of his character name ‘Spanky’.The potential for a broad interpretation of ‘identity’ is best illustrated by the Californian case of White v. [read post]
20 Dec 2012, 8:32 am
That which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet. [read post]
5 Sep 2012, 3:04 am
Will they be in the US for trial? [read post]
3 Sep 2017, 9:03 am
Supreme Court dicta has interpreted good faith as having no knowledge of prior use of the mark (K Mart Corp. v. [read post]
30 Dec 2014, 7:30 am
Baccarat v. [read post]
30 Nov 2010, 4:30 pm
Circuit in Crooker v. [read post]
7 Jul 2012, 2:21 pm
Finding first that Appellant introduced deadly force into the situation, thereby eliminating the ability of further escalation, citing United States v. [read post]
7 Dec 2017, 7:03 am
In Dutcher v. [read post]
18 Jun 2012, 4:24 am
In Rose v. [read post]
5 Apr 2013, 4:41 am
This is how the case arose: Benoit and his girlfriend, Rose DeGraffenreid, resided in Tulsa, Oklahoma, in a home rented by DeGraffenreid. [read post]
12 Oct 2015, 12:11 pm
& Others [2015] EWHC 2760 (Ch), a 6 October 2015 decision of Mrs Justice Rose, sitting in the Chancery Division of the High Court, England and Wales, has attracted a lot of attention on account of its subject matter: the sparkling white wines. [read post]
21 Mar 2008, 7:18 am
Note: The following piece about oral argument in Chamber of Commerce v. [read post]
15 May 2019, 10:06 pm
Plum and Posey Inc.Africa Correspondent Chijioke Okorie posts The proposed fair use exception under South [read post]
28 Jul 2021, 8:49 am
HMRC’s contention was that Mr Haworth’s arrangements, as described above, were, in all material respects the same as those used by the taxpayer in HM Revenue and Customs v Smallwood & Anor [2010] EWCA Civ 778 (“Smallwood”), where it was decided that the “place of effective management” of the trust in question was the UK at the time of the disposal in question, and therefore the gain was subject to UK capital gains tax. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 7:47 pm
The roses were not found on Mr. [read post]
1 Jul 2016, 9:20 am
An exception is Waits v Frito Lay, 978 F. 2d 1093 (9thCir. 1992). [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 8:03 pm
Pitt's Mike Madison says: "The standard for 'transformativeness' that I extract from Campbell v. [read post]
