Search for: "State v. Holder"
Results 7181 - 7200
of 8,253
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
Play By the Rules and Nobody Gets Hurt – Ninth Circuit Offers Guidance on Safe Harbor under the DMCA
11 Jan 2012, 3:08 am
This Ninth Circuit case is similar to the Viacom v. [read post]
14 Oct 2011, 4:00 am
Holder. [read post]
18 Sep 2012, 7:59 am
Holder, JR., et al., No. 12-5072 United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. [read post]
17 Mar 2014, 4:39 am
Holder, Jr., and James R. [read post]
8 May 2011, 8:13 am
., et al. v. [read post]
12 Jul 2016, 1:15 pm
Large donations can entrench office-holders against challengers. [read post]
2 Mar 2011, 11:14 am
" (It addition to describing displacement of state law by federal law, the term frequently came up in law review article discussions: a "preempted" piece failed the novelty prong for a good law review article.) [read post]
17 Nov 2011, 7:01 am
Holder, Op. [read post]
6 Jun 2023, 2:30 pm
Accordingly, because Plaintiff’s complaint does not plausibly allege duty, the claim for Negligence (Count IV) and Gross Negligence (Count V) must be dismissed. [read post]
7 Jun 2012, 8:58 am
(See Board of Trustees v. [read post]
10 Dec 2006, 9:15 pm
" The current holder of the franchise for scholarly biography of Wilson, Arthur S. [read post]
13 Jun 2011, 3:13 pm
The opinion follows the standard adopted by the Ninth Circuit court in Witt v. [read post]
3 Sep 2010, 2:35 pm
AAI contended that Philips failed to rebut the presumption that its agreement with Sony to include the Sony patent in the pool was unreasonable.A copy of the brief appears here on the AAI website.The August 30 decision in Princo Corporation v. [read post]
14 Jun 2014, 6:34 am
The case is styled, Hodges v. [read post]
13 Sep 2024, 12:54 pm
” While the song wasn’t used for profit, the court cited last week’s Second Circuit opinion in Hachette Book Group, Inc. v. [read post]
18 May 2009, 5:24 am
’ (China Law Blog) Europe ECJ finds similar marks on wine and glasses not likely to cause confusion: Waterford Wedgewood plc v Assembled Investments (Proprietary) Ltd, OHIM (Class 46) (IPKat) AG Colomer opines in Maple leaf trade mark battle: joined cases American Clothing Associates SA v OHIM and OHIM v American Clothing Associates SA (IPKat) (Excess Copyright) CFI: Restitutio and time limits: how does the law stand now for CTMs? [read post]
20 Feb 2015, 9:00 am
Such was the case in United States v. [read post]
13 Dec 2023, 8:13 am
V–Sketch of the Geology of Mississippi Art. [read post]
19 Jul 2006, 1:03 pm
Bowers v. [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 3:25 pm
” The content of the redemption notices need not be elaborate Sneil, LLC v. [read post]
