Search for: "Nevada v. United States" Results 941 - 960 of 1,327
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Apr 2014, 6:00 pm by Gordon Firemark
Gerard Dogge (United States District Court of Nevada)   Deadmou5 trademark opposition / battle with Disney? [read post]
19 Mar 2011, 1:17 pm by Steve Kalar
A slow week in the Ninth (for non-capital cases, at least), and an order amending the opinion, gives us an excuse to go back for a second pass at the interesting decision and sentencing issues in United States v. [read post]
13 May 2014, 8:36 am by WIMS
Climate Report - The average temperature for the contiguous United States during April was 51.7°F, 0.7°F above the 20th century average. [read post]
8 Mar 2019, 2:38 am by Lyle Denniston
”, is to put pressure on the state legislature to make Arizona the 38th ratifying state to satisfy Article V of the Constitution. [read post]
24 Jun 2011, 1:54 am by Marie Louise
Hoehn (Electronic Frontier Foundation) (Out-Law) District Court Nevada: Another Righthaven copyright troll lawsuit dismissed as sham: Righthaven v. [read post]
17 Oct 2007, 10:44 am
 In its order, the court commented: “The Supreme Court of the United States has not yet indicated that, in cases in this posture, all executions by lethal injection should be stayed. [read post]
6 May 2011, 1:14 am by Kelly
UMG (Technology & Marketing Law Blog) District Court Nevada: Copyright troll clobbered: Judge finds use of entire news article fair use: Righthaven LLC v. [read post]
21 Jun 2017, 7:59 am by John Elwood
Alabama, 16-7835 Issue: Whether a state court can enforce a rule that Brady v. [read post]
28 May 2021, 10:44 am by Bill Marler
Fresh produce: a growing cause of outbreaks of foodborne illness in the United States, 1973 through 1997. [read post]
21 Jan 2021, 12:54 pm by John Elwood
A Nevada church is challenging Gov. [read post]
In March of 2018, the Ninth Circuit Court reversed a decision by the United States District Court for the District of Nevada that tossed claims brought by customers affected by the data breach who claimed that the breach left them in “imminent” risk, because they did not allege having already suffered financial losses. [read post]