Search for: "Community Services, Incorporated v. the United States"
Results 61 - 80
of 798
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Oct 2022, 6:23 am
Haaland v. [read post]
12 Jul 2013, 2:41 pm
The brief argues that “The uncertain threat of litigation in United States courts, especially for conduct with no significant connection to the United States, could therefore discourage foreign commercial enterprises from establishing channels for their distribution of goods and services in the United States, or otherwise making investments in the United States. [read post]
24 Oct 2020, 11:34 am
Thus, for example, this is particularly relevant to the care taken with the factual exposition now incorporated into a readily accessible document (Hatice Cengiz v. [read post]
21 Mar 2017, 9:31 am
Intelligence Community. [read post]
7 Sep 2021, 7:12 am
Uber Inc. v. [read post]
2 Jan 2015, 9:40 pm
Procedural HistoryIn April 2008, SSL filed suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas alleging that Citrix’s GoTo Products infringe claim 27 of the ‘796 Patent. [read post]
29 May 2017, 7:31 am
’ United States v. [read post]
4 Dec 2022, 5:20 am
Attorney-client communications are protected for similar reasons as the deliberative proves privilege — ensuring candid communications, in particular, client candor critical to providing legal representation. [read post]
19 Nov 2007, 5:45 am
Schwab v. [read post]
19 Nov 2007, 5:45 am
Schwab v. [read post]
9 Feb 2010, 8:22 am
The primary objective of the adjustments to the Schedule of Fees is to ensure that fees for consular services reflect costs to the United States of providing the services. [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 2:44 pm
Kelo v. [read post]
26 Oct 2014, 8:23 pm
Consideration of Hamdi v. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 10:13 am
’ United States v. [read post]
21 Dec 2020, 4:01 am
In its July 16 opinion in Data Protection Commissioner v. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 5:00 am
If the State did not entrust Freed with responsibilities to communicate in such a manner, it could not “fairly be blamed” for Freed’s manner of doing so. [read post]
14 Jan 2007, 1:41 pm
In reaching its decision: the court: Found that Peachtree's participation in Google's AdWords program and Peachtree's incorporation of Wentworth's marks in Peachtree's keyword meta tags did constitute trademark use under the Lanham Act; Agreed with Wentworth that "initial interest confusion" is actionable under the Lanham Act; Acknowledged, but "respectfully" disagreed with, conflicting authority from other circuits; Specifically disagreed… [read post]
24 Aug 2014, 10:55 pm
See, e.g., United States v. [read post]
15 Nov 2018, 10:30 pm
Eisman of counsel), amicus curiae pro se.Morningside Heights Legal Services, Inc., New York, NY (Elora Mukherjee, National Immigrant Justice Center [Mark Fleming and Katherine Melloy Goettel], pro se, and Christopher N. [read post]
1 Apr 2016, 8:06 am
The press release continued by stating: The Department plans to discuss with the negotiating committee how to protect students from forced arbitration and incorporate crucial elements of state consumer protection laws in these regulations. [read post]
