Search for: "United States v. Gear" Results 61 - 80 of 550
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Dec 2021, 8:44 am by Eugene Volokh
I'll begin by laying out a few categories of situations where the risk of reputational harm is especially serious, and then summarize the state of court decisions on the subject. [1.] [read post]
16 Nov 2021, 12:00 am by Jason Kelley
And what we found was that almost every major law enforcement agency across the United States already has these tools. [read post]
19 Oct 2021, 4:23 pm by Nigel Stacey
Between 2000 and 2014, overboard falls were the second leading cause of death among commercial fishermen in the United States. [read post]
8 Oct 2021, 10:26 am by Somil Trivedi
United States, about what prior acts can trigger overly harsh federal sentences for gun possession. [read post]
These were two of the key questions which the Court of Appeal grappled with in Thaler v Comptroller General of Patents [2021] EWCA Civ 1374. [read post]
These were two of the key questions which the Court of Appeal grappled with in Thaler v Comptroller General of Patents [2021] EWCA Civ 1374. [read post]
20 Sep 2021, 7:07 am by Eugene Volokh
The United States Department of State, the USCIS, and the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles all allow religious head coverings in photographs used for identification. [read post]
10 Sep 2021, 10:30 am by Lydia Estep
(EDTX 2017) (patent infringement) and a $2,600,000 verdict in DPX Gear v Prince et al. [read post]
24 Aug 2021, 11:39 am by Lydia Estep
(EDTX 2017) (patent infringement) and a $2,600,000 verdict in DPX Gear v Prince et al. [read post]
11 Aug 2021, 9:52 am by Jon L. Gelman
Additionally, Monsanto admitted that it never conducted any long-term carcinogenicity studies on any of the formulations that it’s sold in the United States.Holding:The Court held that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIRRA) 7 U.S.C. ch. 6 §136 et al. does not preempt state law. [read post]
22 Jul 2021, 8:52 pm by Lydia Estep
(EDTX 2017) (patent infringement) and a $2,600,000 verdict in DPX Gear v Prince et al. [read post]