Search for: "US v. Boss"
Results 61 - 80
of 1,560
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Apr 2023, 4:47 am
He explains why in this remarkable passage from his concurrence to Kisor v. [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 7:00 am
Check out SpringLaw’s Boss Law Bootcamp, which contains guides, checklists and templates to help with that softer landing for all. [read post]
15 Apr 2023, 5:03 pm
Without reaching trial or a verdict, the Dominion Voting Systems v. [read post]
14 Apr 2023, 12:30 pm
Your case is dismissed under Rooker-Feldman and Younger *and* Heck v. [read post]
11 Apr 2023, 11:44 am
Publ’ns, Inc., 135 USPQ 374, 375 (TTAB 1962). [2] Ex parte Meredith Publ’g Co., 109 USPQ 426, 426 (Comm’r Pats. 1956). [3] Lens.com, Inc. v. 1-800 Contacts, Inc., 686 F.3d 1376 (Fed. [read post]
11 Apr 2023, 11:44 am
Publ’ns, Inc., 135 USPQ 374, 375 (TTAB 1962). [2] Ex parte Meredith Publ’g Co., 109 USPQ 426, 426 (Comm’r Pats. 1956). [3] Lens.com, Inc. v. 1-800 Contacts, Inc., 686 F.3d 1376 (Fed. [read post]
6 Apr 2023, 5:55 am
Impermissible outside influences include both attempts at witness tampering and juror animus, such as in Pena-Rodriguez v. [read post]
6 Apr 2023, 3:30 am
After Cohen, in Holder v. [read post]
4 Apr 2023, 6:25 am
One comparator was her boss, and the other as a peer. [read post]
4 Apr 2023, 3:42 am
"Whether a non-syndicated column that is, for example, “printed, downloadable, or recorded on electronic media,” TMEP Section 1202.07(a), is a good in trade should be analyzed using the same standard we use to assess goods in trade issues in other contexts.The Board therefore adopted a new test, based on Lens.com, Inc. v. 1-800 Contacts, Inc., 686 F.3d 1376, 103 USPQ2d 1672, 1676 (Fed. [read post]
28 Mar 2023, 5:00 am
In an October 2016 meeting, the plaintiff voiced his concerns over the company's plan to use "creative accounting" to inflate earnings by $12 million and show a much greater profit margin. [read post]
17 Mar 2023, 9:49 am
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in Splestoser v. [read post]
17 Mar 2023, 8:25 am
More about us: a recent amicus brief filed by the International Center for Law & Economics and 20 scholars of antitrust law and economics (including your humble scribe, but also, and not for nothin’, a Nobel laureate), explains some of the pro-competitive potential of such agreements, both generally and with a focus on a specific case, Delandes v. [read post]
10 Mar 2023, 2:12 pm
Circuit (Jan. 26, 2010) (explaining that "the court strongly urges parties to limit the use of acronyms"), with Int'l Org. of Masters, Mates & Pilots, ILA, AFL-CIO v. [read post]
9 Mar 2023, 11:59 am
Campbell v. [read post]
3 Mar 2023, 6:21 am
” Under New York Times v. [read post]
1 Mar 2023, 3:00 pm
ShareIf the justices’ comments during Wednesday’s argument in New York v. [read post]
17 Feb 2023, 5:19 am
From McKenna v. [read post]
7 Feb 2023, 9:21 am
In this case, according to court filings in Doe v. [read post]
6 Feb 2023, 9:01 pm
And he writes, in muted terms, that “the outside experts seemed to agree with us” and “the sense of the group seemed clear: we had a case, but it was not without issues. [read post]
