Search for: "R. R. D. v. Holder" Results 801 - 820 of 903
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 May 2008, 11:21 am
This argument failed because Congress "impose[d] no affirmative duty of any kind on any" state. [read post]
10 Oct 2009, 9:56 pm
Magistrates in the Tang Dynasty in early China were also eager to avoid the formal legal system and so encouraged parties to resolve disputes amicably between themselves.[9] In contrast, the United States’ patent law can be seen in the case of Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. [read post]
22 Mar 2025, 11:28 am
 Pix credit here Genesis 3:24 speaks about a flaming sword  which was entrusted to the cherubim by God to guard the gates of Paradise (or in the Hebrew version and perhaps more accurately to prevent access to the Tree of Life (וַיַּשְׁכֵּן מִקֶּדֶם לְגַן-עֵדֶן… [read post]
13 Jan 2016, 5:05 pm by Kevin LaCroix
In the following guest post from John Reed Stark, President, John Reed Stark Consulting LLC, and David R. [read post]
7 Sep 2021, 2:03 am by Keith Mallinson
SEP licensing fee income is crucial to fund the substantial ongoing R&D investments by all these licensor companies, also including InterDigital. [read post]
27 Sep 2019, 6:00 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Maggie Chon: building on rent extraction being not inherently bad—is it reinvested in R&D and innovation generation that might lead to more growth/inclusion of labor? [read post]
9 Sep 2009, 11:18 pm
  Ian Boyko, Canadian Federation of Students Expand fair dealing in line with the case of CHH v. [read post]
25 Sep 2024, 7:57 am by Kristian Stout
Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) and Michael Braun (R-Ind.), the Medication Affordability and Patent Integrity Act is premised on the assertion (for which its proponents have fostered no substantial evidence) that there is a widespread problem of pharmaceutical companies systematically deceiving both the USPTO and the U.S. [read post]
29 Jan 2025, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
 Hyatt III abrogated this aspect of Hall, concluding instead that as an "essential component of federalism," by entering the Union, the States, which had previously "relate[d] to each other solely as foreign sovereigns" were "strip[ped] . . . of any power they once had to refuse each other sovereign immunity" under international law (Hyatt III, 587 US at 245, 247 [internal quotation marks omitted]). [read post]