Search for: "United States v. Edwards" Results 841 - 860 of 2,101
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Sep 2013, 5:01 pm by Raffaela Wakeman
 By way of rejoinder, the United States insisted that the parties had not relied upon the documents, before the lower court or in their appeals briefing. [read post]
24 Apr 2014, 10:26 am by Ruthann Robson
  Lane is not the only one to argue that the Eleventh Circuit’s categorical exclusion of First Amendment protection for subpoenaed testimony is incorrect:  the Solicitor General, representing the United States as an amicus, agrees with him. [read post]
24 Dec 2020, 8:30 am by Andrew Hamm
United States 20-291Issue: Whether the term “covered offense” in the First Step Act of 2018 includes violations of 21 U.S.C. [read post]
13 Oct 2016, 6:50 am by Dennis Crouch
Alcon Lensx, Inc., No. 16-48 (limits on arbitrator autonomy in patent cases) Interference: Edward Tobinick v. [read post]
24 Dec 2016, 7:00 am by Quinta Jurecic
Orin Kerr responded to April Doss’s earlier post on United States v. [read post]
9 Jun 2017, 3:00 am by SOG Staff
  The United States Supreme Court granted cert this week in Carpenter v. [read post]
7 Mar 2013, 7:15 am by Cormac Early
Again at the Volokh Conspiracy, Nick Rosencranz responds to arguments in the amicus brief filed by Dale Carpenter and others in United States v. [read post]
10 May 2012, 1:14 pm by WSLL
CiteID=465579Certified Question from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, The Honorable William C. [read post]
7 Oct 2014, 3:43 am by Amy Howe
In Education Week’s School Law Blog, Mark Walsh covers yesterday’s order inviting the United States to weigh in on Ridley School District v. [read post]
29 Sep 2022, 1:50 pm by Amy Howe
District Judge Edward Lodge held that the Sacketts’ property contains wetlands, and that those wetlands are “waters of the United States” because they are adjacent to Priest Lake, which is a “traditional navigable water. [read post]
25 Jul 2022, 8:49 pm by Florian Mueller
Davila of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California granted IPCom's December 2021 motion to dismiss an amended complaint by Lenovo and its Motorola Mobility subsidiary that alleged breach of contract, monopolization in violation of U.S. antitrust law (Sherman Act Sec. 2), and sought a declaratory judgment of non-infringement of two IPCom patents. [read post]