Search for: "U. S. v. Marks"
Results 781 - 800
of 1,323
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Apr 2018, 1:47 pm
Greene’s Energy Group, but losing on the statutory question presented in SAS Institute v. [read post]
3 Nov 2011, 2:35 am
Some answers are found in Schlissel v Subramanian ;2009 NY Slip Op 52188(U) ; Decided on October 26, 2009 ; Supreme Court, Kings County ; Demarest, J. [read post]
8 Jul 2012, 1:00 pm
On the one hand, the First Circuit’s decision in Cusumano v. [read post]
4 Oct 2019, 6:14 am
Life After Hate, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Sep 2017, 5:45 am
He had been charged with having painted on the house of a family of Pakistani descent the words "Dots U Smell" -- a scurrilous, offensive allusion that incorporates a reference to the tika, a mark on the forehead of some Hindus, especially women, indicating caste or status, or worn by both sexes as an ornament. [read post]
10 Jul 2011, 2:00 pm
U. [read post]
10 Apr 2023, 5:09 am
Corp. v Insurance Co. of N. [read post]
20 May 2011, 7:42 pm
Note: From Shanghai to Globocourt: An Analysis of the "Comfort Women's" Defeat in Hwang v. [read post]
9 Nov 2015, 7:09 am
Continental Grain Co., 587 A.2d 702, 704 (Pa. 1991) (emphasis added) (citation and quotation marks omitted).Another equivalent standard for punitive damages is that the plaintiff is “substantially certain” to be injured. [read post]
25 Jan 2011, 5:11 am
White, 548 U. [read post]
3 Dec 2009, 9:00 pm
Peglera, 33 F.3d 412, 413 (4th Cir. 1994) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). [read post]
13 May 2009, 5:47 am
"Here are the dockets: 05/13/09 U N I T E D S T A T E S T A X C O U R T D O C K E T E N T R I E S Docket No. 3058-08 INDEX Charles E. [read post]
11 Oct 2022, 10:46 am
In many cases, this means the company must advertise that this feature (such as orange doors for U-Haul or the magenta color for T-Mobile) refers specifically to the company’s product or service offering. [read post]
2 Dec 2015, 6:21 am
(quoting 435 U.S. at 295-96 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted)). [read post]
6 May 2008, 12:37 pm
In ruling on Nikolai's challenge, the Karenev court cited a federal decision issued by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals: Kramer v. [read post]
11 Nov 2022, 9:40 am
Sanofi, marking the first time that the Court has taken up patent law’s enablement requirement since enactment of the Patent Act of 1952. [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 4:57 am
S. 42, 44– 45 (1950); Sonzinsky v. [read post]
3 Jan 2014, 5:52 am
Steel Corp. v. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:52 am
” Golonka, 65 P.3d at 971-72 (citations and quotation marks omitted). [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 8:55 am
” Townsend, 147 Wn.2d at 673 (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Kadoranian v. [read post]
