Search for: "Bayer v. State" Results 61 - 80 of 645
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Apr 2012, 9:59 pm by Patent Docs
George Pieczenik's complaint for failing to state a claim on which relief could be granted, as well as dismissing his charge of copyright infringement and denying his request for compulsory mediation and motion for recusal. [read post]
22 Sep 2009, 4:53 am
 2008) (dismissing state consumer fraud and false advertising and RICO claims); Ethex v. [read post]
8 Mar 2012, 3:07 am by sally
Supreme Court W (Algeria) & Anor v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] UKSC 8 (7 March 2012) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Gedeon Richter Plc v Bayer Pharma AG [2012] EWCA Civ 235 (07 March 2012) Miah & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 261 (07 March 2012) Lamichhane v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 260 (07 March 2012) Zieleniewski v… [read post]
16 Dec 2016, 8:23 pm by Kate Howard
The petition of the day is: Belmora LLC v. [read post]
3 Sep 2009, 6:18 am
" The article states that according to the Judicial Business of the United States Courts:  Annual Report of the Director, tbl. [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 7:34 am by WIMS
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas. [read post]
16 Jul 2012, 11:33 am by Mack Sperling
It's not every day that you see a "mandatory injunction,"  In fact, Judge Jolly said last Friday that such an injunction was "rare and generally disfavored as an interlocutory remedy," in Bayer Cropscience LP v. [read post]
16 Jul 2012, 11:33 am by Mack Sperling
It's not every day that you see a "mandatory injunction,"  In fact, Judge Jolly said last Friday that such an injunction was "rare and generally disfavored as an interlocutory remedy," in Bayer Cropscience LP v. [read post]
11 May 2016, 4:03 am
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Belmora LLC v Bayer Consumer Care AG, et al., Appeal No. 15-1335 (4th Cir. [read post]
1 Oct 2007, 12:16 pm
View the PDF hereDenial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus from convictions on charges associated with the alleged sexual abuse of petitioner's then-six-year-old step daughter is affirmed as a state court's decisions regarding the admissibility of the child victim's hearsay statements did not involve an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law, and were not based on an unreasonable determination of the facts. [read post]