Search for: "US v. Smith"
Results 7981 - 8000
of 9,462
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Jan 2010, 10:44 am
[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation. [read post]
4 Jan 2010, 7:24 am
The American Constitution Society interviewed Paul Smith, counsel for the plaintiffs in the landmark Court case Lawrence v. [read post]
4 Jan 2010, 6:00 am
Piao v. [read post]
4 Jan 2010, 3:23 am
: Catnic Components Ltd & Anor v Hill and Smith Ltd (Spicy IP) United States US Patents BPAI rules for ex parte appeals: Request for comment and notice of roundtable (Patently-O) Bilski and Warsaw share insights (AwakenIP) US Patents – Decisions CAFC: False marking statute applies on a per article basis: Forest Group, Inc v Bon Tool Co (GRAY On Claims) (EPLAW) (Washington State Patent Law Blog) You say tomato... [read post]
3 Jan 2010, 11:07 pm
In Smith v. [read post]
3 Jan 2010, 8:11 pm
Christopher Smith, 2009 Pa. [read post]
3 Jan 2010, 6:15 am
We thus conclude on the record before us "that there are . . . mitigating factor[s] of a kind or to a degree, not otherwise adequately taken into account by the guidelines" (People v Santiago, 20 AD3d 885, 886 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Smith, 30 AD3d at 1071; Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary, at 4). [read post]
2 Jan 2010, 6:10 pm
In 1991, in State v. [read post]
1 Jan 2010, 3:30 pm
In People v. [read post]
31 Dec 2009, 4:40 pm
The question presented is what standard the federal court should apply in considering such a claim, and in particular whether the federal court can consider evidence that was not presented to the state courts. ------- Title: Smith v. [read post]
31 Dec 2009, 1:02 pm
In today’s case (Bay v. [read post]
31 Dec 2009, 11:46 am
Smiths Medical, 165 P.3d 433, 438 (Wyo. 2007) (our prior post here), where the plaintiff claimed a defect could be "inferred because a medical device fractured while implanted in his body. [read post]
31 Dec 2009, 7:38 am
Indeed, in Meyer v. [read post]
30 Dec 2009, 11:51 am
July In July the decision is published in the OFT v. [read post]
29 Dec 2009, 2:20 am
The case is Sapp & Smith v. [read post]
28 Dec 2009, 10:05 pm
Project, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Dec 2009, 2:47 pm
Just because I'm 19, was fired for embezzlement, and am carrying a loaded Smith & Wesson .38, you have the audacity to order that as a condition of probation, I can't smoke weed four times a week? [read post]
28 Dec 2009, 6:39 am
U.S. v. [read post]
28 Dec 2009, 6:00 am
Smith Corp. [read post]
28 Dec 2009, 3:20 am
Heimbach, Michael V. [read post]
