Search for: "Banning Company v. California"
Results 721 - 740
of 1,172
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Jan 2015, 8:32 am
Circuit found in Verizon v. [read post]
7 Jan 2015, 10:52 am
At its Conference on January 9, 2015, the Court will consider petitions seeking review of issues such as state bans on same-sex marriage, proof of intent in a constructive discharge case, personal jurisdiction to award a no-contact order, and the presumption of judicial vindictiveness under North Carolina v. [read post]
7 Jan 2015, 8:36 am
(see, e.g., Playboy v. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 1:18 pm
Oct. 7, 2014); and Langston v. 20/20,Companies, Inc., 2014 Wl 5335734 (C.D. [read post]
5 Jan 2015, 3:31 pm
California Registered IA. [read post]
27 Dec 2014, 2:19 am
Judge Kimball ruled that Aereo's retransmission of video signals was "indistinguishable from a cable company. [read post]
Samsung argues Apple still can't tie patented features to lost sales, latest bid for ban should fail
22 Dec 2014, 5:30 am
I now tend to come down on the skeptical side, and that's to some extent also (though not only) because this second California Apple v. [read post]
18 Dec 2014, 10:48 pm
Two weeks ago, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held a hearing on the damages award and underlying liability issues in the first Apple v. [read post]
18 Dec 2014, 9:17 am
Co., Inc. v. [read post]
25 Nov 2014, 8:49 pm
., there has been a much lower frequency of Apple v. [read post]
24 Nov 2014, 8:44 am
Had the lawsuit been in California, it would have almost certainly triggered anti-SLAPP protection and probably would have run afoul of California’s new law banning anti-review clauses. [read post]
18 Nov 2014, 1:28 pm
As shown below, the California Department of Justice (“DOJ”), which enforces Section 26820, applies the law to ban the display of any picture or physical depiction of a handgun. [read post]
21 Oct 2014, 1:57 pm
In Carrera v. [read post]
11 Oct 2014, 9:45 am
Cf. 4thcircuit’s AOL v. [read post]
8 Oct 2014, 9:00 am
Harris 13-1313Issue: Whether the Commerce Clause allows California to impose a complete ban on the sale of wholesome, USDA-approved poultry products from other States and countries - in this case, foie gras - based solely on the agricultural methods used by out-of-state farmers who raise their animals entirely beyond California's borders. [read post]
29 Sep 2014, 8:40 am
For a (rare) example in which one of these statutes comes up, see Davis v. [read post]
19 Sep 2014, 7:00 am
In United States v. [read post]
8 Sep 2014, 11:54 pm
Apple was in such a hurry that it immediately appealed the denial of a sales ban, but as I wrote on Thursday (when I reported on Apple's motion for postjudgment royalties of $6.46 per device that infringes the three patents underlying the liability findings), all the appeals relating to the second California Apple v. [read post]
3 Sep 2014, 9:00 am
Aetna Life Insurance Company v. [read post]
27 Aug 2014, 12:41 pm
This is a very significant setback for Apple, which less than six months ago had already failed, despite a partly-successful appeal, to obtain a sales ban against Samsung in the first California litigation between the two companies, an outcome that Apple accepted as final about a month ago when it withdrew its related cross-appeal.The denial of an injunction following the recent trial in the second California case is based on Apple's failure to satisfy the… [read post]
