Search for: "United States v. California"
Results 8441 - 8460
of 13,840
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Feb 2010, 12:42 pm
[Varnum v. [read post]
19 Jul 2009, 11:31 pm
The United States Supreme Court has now held - and the California Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal for the Second District have recognized - that a jury in an individual lawsuit may not impose punitive damages to punish conduct that did not harm the plaintiff. [read post]
3 Nov 2010, 5:51 am
Sevidal v. [read post]
20 Dec 2007, 7:47 am
Title V/CSHCN has supported care notebooks for families and hired parent advocates around the state. [read post]
9 Oct 2014, 9:12 am
”Id. at 1141-42 (various citations omitted).Courts in other states following this general approach are: Haygood v. [read post]
11 Mar 2014, 11:12 pm
No. 3015), to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit".A notice of appeal always has the broadest scope, but in a complex case like this, appellants typically later focus on a limited number of key issues. [read post]
2 Nov 2020, 6:14 am
In United States v. [read post]
13 Oct 2017, 8:23 am
Related Cases: Alasaad v. [read post]
Google makes itself ridiculous, tells appeals court something Microsoft can disprove with transcript
12 Dec 2013, 11:30 am
Three weeks ago I was thoroughly disappointed that Samsung's lawyers had told Judge Koh in the Northern District of California that Apple had no more options let to salvage a patent but to file a notice of appeal, which was plain wrong: the official communication by the USPTO that Samsung submitted to the court stated clearly that Apple did have other options. [read post]
25 Jul 2016, 3:03 am
TBMP § 1113.01.Early Recognition claimed the right to exclusive use of the subject mark for the entire United States, except for the County of San Francisco within the state of California. [read post]
13 Apr 2018, 8:15 am
” The same problem doomed the California state claims, there under the heading of “lost money or property. [read post]
14 Oct 2018, 9:38 am
County Jail deputiesUnited States v. [read post]
2 Oct 2020, 1:38 pm
§ 1182(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which authorizes the president to bar entry of foreign nationals “detrimental to the interests of the United States”—the same provision that Trump used for his travel ban, which the Supreme Court upheld in Trump v. [read post]
8 Jan 2018, 12:00 am
Sept. 28, 2017), the United States District Court for the Northern District of California granted XOMA Corp. [read post]
19 Jul 2015, 6:28 pm
(for the government).United States v. [read post]
17 Dec 2017, 9:15 am
Held: “We conclude that [the holding in United States v. [read post]
6 Dec 2022, 3:13 pm
” The Southern District of California reached a similar holding in Pipich v. [read post]
18 Jan 2024, 9:01 pm
The rule builds on the Biden Administration’s initiative to address the mental health epidemic in the United States. [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 7:40 am
United States – Whether the constitutional freedom of the press, guaranteed by the First Amendment, was subordinate to a claimed need of the executive branch of government to maintain the secrecy of information. [read post]
3 Nov 2015, 9:09 am
Hansen In Scher v. [read post]
