Search for: "S. W. v. State"
Results 8821 - 8840
of 14,895
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jan 2013, 6:44 am
Perry (the challenge to California’s Proposition 8), and United States v. [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 12:29 pm
The '564 Patent '564 Patent - meet your nemesis Claim 1 of the '564 patent entitled "Insecticidal combination effective against fleas on mammals, particularly cats and dogs" claimed the following A composition which provides small mammals with long-lasting protection against fleas, which includes, on the one hand, [fipronil] and, on the other hand, at least one ovicidal compound (B), of insect growth regulator (IGR) type, in a fluid vehicle which is acceptable to the mammal and suitable… [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 6:09 am
Co-authored by: Jeremy W. [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 1:02 am
The petitioners assert that marijuana’s Schedule I status is the only thing preventing courts from recognizing the defense, citing United States v. [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 1:02 am
The petitioners assert that marijuana’s Schedule I status is the only thing preventing courts from recognizing the defense, citing United States v. [read post]
21 Jan 2013, 4:43 am
U.S. v. [read post]
21 Jan 2013, 1:25 am
The twitching was erroneous in Rocknroll v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2013] EWHC 24 (Ch), a Chancery Division (England and Wales) decision of Mr Justice Briggs last week that had no shake-rattle-and-roll in it at all. [read post]
19 Jan 2013, 4:18 am
Perry (the challenge to California’s Proposition 8) and United States v. [read post]
18 Jan 2013, 2:06 pm
The Decherts are too involved in this litigation to comment publicly.There aren’t many research-oriented pharmaceutical companies based in Alabama, and after last week’s execrable decision in Wyeth, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Jan 2013, 11:37 am
Sprigman: Came up in Apple v. [read post]
18 Jan 2013, 7:22 am
Perry (the challenge to California’s Proposition 8) and United States v. [read post]
18 Jan 2013, 7:17 am
Perry (involving Proposition 8) and United States v. [read post]
18 Jan 2013, 7:01 am
Co. v. [read post]
18 Jan 2013, 4:52 am
State v. [read post]
17 Jan 2013, 7:30 pm
These and more are the current forms of governmental interference, in furtherance of the sometimes-admitted goal of making abortion services unavailable, state-by-state, just as surely as criminal bans prior to Roe v. [read post]
17 Jan 2013, 1:05 pm
Pom’s fallback argument was that its ads were only potentially misleading under the terrible Pearson v. [read post]
17 Jan 2013, 8:05 am
Perry (the challenge to California’s Proposition 8) and United States v. [read post]
17 Jan 2013, 8:04 am
W. [read post]
16 Jan 2013, 9:40 am
Jenack Estate Appraisers & Auctioneers, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Jan 2013, 6:40 am
Jenack Estate Appraisers & Auctioneers, Inc. v. [read post]
