Search for: "Does 1-4 v. United States Attorney Office" Results 881 - 900 of 1,996
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Nov 2017, 6:02 am by Wolfgang Demino
In a 2013 enforcement action against Midland, its servicer, and its parent company, the Texas Attorney General averred that the price Midland pays is 3.3% of the face value of the debt.Excerpt from State's Amended Original Petition in Cause No, 2011-40626 - STATE OF TEXAS (ACTING BY AND THROUGH ATTORNEY GEN vs. [read post]
5 Nov 2017, 6:02 am by Wolfgang Demino
In a 2013 state AG enforcement action against Midland for illegal debt collection practices, its servicer, and its parent company, the Texas Attorney General averred that the price Midland pays is 3.3% of the face value of the debt.Excerpt from State's Amended Original Petition in Cause No, 2011-40626 - STATE OF TEXAS (ACTING BY AND THROUGH ATTORNEY GEN vs. [read post]
27 Oct 2017, 4:53 am by SHG
The First Circuit Court of Appeals decision in United States v. [read post]
23 Oct 2017, 9:01 pm by Joanna L. Grossman
It’s disturbing, to say the least.Perhaps the United States will never be Gilead. [read post]
6 Oct 2017, 11:39 pm by Wolfgang Demino
Moreover, the terms stated on Page 1 were not agreed to by both parties because the lender had not yet approved the loan.So, Page 1, without more, does not constitute an executed loan contract, or an integrated one. [read post]
5 Oct 2017, 7:23 am by Marty Lederman
”  Thus, as the Solicitor General explainedto the Supreme Court in the recent United States v. [read post]
21 Sep 2017, 5:06 am
Although the PTO does have a great copyright group, section 701 of the Copyright Act directs the Copyright Office to:(1) administer the Copyright Act (including all registration and recordation of copyrights);(2) advise Congress on national and international issues relating to copyright;(3) assist other federal agencie [read post]
18 Sep 2017, 1:36 am
O’Malley (Judge, Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, USA) explained that currently, there were three avenues to challenge patents in the United States – through the District Courts up to the CAFC, through the International Trade Commission, and through the USPTO Patent and Trademark Appeal Boards (PTAB) to the CAFC. [read post]