Search for: "Brennan Corp. v. United States"
Results 61 - 80
of 100
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jan 2013, 7:25 am
Nearly three years ago, Justice Alito found himself in the center of a controversy when President Obama in his speech criticized the Court’s (then) recently issued decision in Citizens United v. [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 4:00 am
, says: In the same way that Congress did not intend to cabin section 602’s application to copies from countries with a shorter term or compulsory licenses, the legislative record provides no evidence that it intended its application to situations where a trademark owner adds a copyrightable insignia or label on goods to protect against their parallel importation into the United States. [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 4:00 am
The Software and Information Industry Association, arguing that “the Copyright Act contains the flexibility to deal with unforeseen applications of section 602″, says: In the same way that Congress did not intend to cabin section 602’s application to copies from countries with a shorter term or compulsory licenses, the legislative record provides no evidence that it intended its application to situations where a trademark owner adds a copyrightable insignia or label on goods… [read post]
22 Jun 2020, 8:51 am
United States, 509 U.S. 544, 550, 113 S.Ct. 2766, 125 L.Ed.2d 441 (1993), quoting M. [read post]
2 Sep 2022, 5:01 am
That three-Justice opinion (written by Justice Brennan and joined by Justices Marshall and Stevens) stressed that the tax exemption was not a permissible accommodation of religion, because it "burdens nonbeneficiaries markedly"[14] "by increasing their tax bills by whatever amount is needed to offset the benefit bestowed on subscribers to religious publications. [read post]
19 Apr 2013, 6:54 am
On Monday, the Court also heard argument in United States v. [read post]
22 Nov 2022, 7:47 am
United States (1928). [read post]
17 Mar 2022, 10:34 am
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corp. v. [read post]
16 Jun 2016, 10:24 am
’s opinion announcement in United States Army Corps of Engineers v. [read post]
17 Jul 2022, 9:05 pm
”[15] The purpose of a restatement is to clarify “the underlying principles of the common law” that have “become obscured by the ever-growing mass of decisions in the many different jurisdictions, state and federal, within the United States. [read post]
12 Jun 2023, 5:31 am
Last week's Supreme Court decision in Health & Hospital Corp. of Marion County v. [read post]
11 Nov 2013, 9:09 pm
” Corp. of Presiding Bishop of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. [read post]
3 Oct 2021, 1:33 pm
MITE Corp., Justices disagreed about this position. [read post]
3 Oct 2021, 1:33 pm
MITE Corp., Justices disagreed about this position. [read post]
16 Apr 2015, 2:31 pm
Corp. v. [read post]
11 Apr 2008, 9:00 am
No problem…: Lundbeck A/S v Generics UK Ltd & Ors: (IPKat), Exelon (Rivastigmine Tartrate) – Dr Reddy’s and Novartis settle Exelon patent dispute: (Therapeutics Daily), GeneMaker – Codon Devices, Blue Heron Biotechnology settle patent suit over gene synthesis platform: (Patent Docs), Glucophage (Metformin) – Depomed settles patent litigation against IVAX: (SmartBrief), (IP Law360), (GenericsWeb), Lexapro… [read post]
19 Feb 2021, 11:04 am
Most recently, in Citizens United v. [read post]
7 Dec 2020, 8:34 am
Most recently, in Citizens United v. [read post]
20 Oct 2006, 1:49 pm
Transit Admin., No. 06-1029, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, 463 F.3d 50; 2006 U.S. [read post]
3 Sep 2015, 1:52 pm
Addressing the merits of the Title VII claim, the district court determined that his claim was controlled by the Supreme Court’s decisions in Johnson v Transportation Agency, Santa Clara County, California (480 U.S. 616 (1987)), and United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO-CLC v Weber (20 EPD ¶30,026 (1979). [read post]
