Search for: "US v. Givens"
Results 8321 - 8340
of 51,309
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Dec 2011, 6:00 am
In Diop v. [read post]
23 Oct 2009, 5:00 am
US, 128 S. [read post]
13 Jan 2020, 7:12 am
In Moussouris v. [read post]
9 Feb 2018, 8:05 am
Hargan v. [read post]
31 Jan 2012, 6:36 am
In the matter of Department of Housing and Urban Development v. [read post]
3 Dec 2013, 12:20 pm
Automotive, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Jun 2015, 2:40 pm
Eleven years ago, the US Supreme Court upended its jurisprudence of the Confrontation Clause in Crawford v. [read post]
1 Jul 2022, 9:42 am
Defamation * US Dominion Inc. v. [read post]
7 Oct 2015, 10:21 am
Young v. [read post]
14 Mar 2007, 4:11 am
" State v. [read post]
26 Aug 2015, 7:01 am
”) DiCenzo v. [read post]
20 Oct 2022, 9:15 pm
The eye-catching 56% increase for a 510(k) submission could be burdensome to many device manufacturers given that the 510(k) premarket notification is the most frequently used regulatory pathway for medical devices. [read post]
1 Jun 2021, 8:15 am
Allied-Bruce Terminix Cos. v. [read post]
29 Dec 2012, 8:55 am
People v. [read post]
MySpace Evidence: Maryland Appeals Court Allows Circumstantial Authentication -- Griffin v. Maryland
28 May 2010, 4:52 pm
[Post by Venkat] Griffin v. [read post]
21 Aug 2016, 7:21 am
Also, its coverage of Oracle v. [read post]
12 Nov 2020, 5:39 am
” Given the similarity in the words—wherein only the last two letters of the first word differ—the board found there was no “significant difference between the marks. [read post]
25 May 2015, 4:15 am
This time, Darren hosts a post by Bernard McDonald, technical assisant at Gill, Jennings & Every, who reports on the issuance of the revised proposal.* Colourless Copaxone in the clear: Teva's synthesis patents held to be (mostly) validThe never-ending litigation between Synthon and Teva over Copaxone (glatiramer acetate) has already given us interesting and striking decisions from the Patents Court [also here], the Court of… [read post]
28 May 2014, 4:00 am
Taerk has given Ms. [read post]
29 Jul 2014, 12:24 am
The Opposition Division was much more critical of the evidence given by the same witnesses and decided that it was ‘not convinced’ that any of the devices used in the clinical trial had a cupped disc. [read post]
