Search for: "United States v. May" Results 9881 - 9900 of 47,776
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
31 Aug 2012, 11:06 am by Keith Reinfeld
  I explained that these settlements must be approved by either a United States District Court or the United States Department of Labor (“DOL”) to constitute a valid release. [read post]
26 Aug 2014, 7:50 am
Constitution or Title 28 of the United States Code if it issues proposed findings and rulings on the type of issue identified in Stern v. [read post]
21 Jan 2013, 5:30 am by Barry Herman & Jim Lennon
Infousa, Inc. the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit determined that the district court properly ruled the relevant patent claims of US Patent No. 6,631,400 were invalid as a result of being obvious. [read post]
18 Apr 2017, 6:52 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Medrad, on the other hand, argues that this Court does not have the authority to dismiss its invalidity and unenforceability counterclaims as moot because, according to Medrad, the United States Supreme Court has held that a finding of non-infringement does not moot an invalidity counterclaim. [read post]
14 May 2008, 7:51 am
United States (1991)), but parties must consent to the delegation. [read post]
11 Oct 2018, 4:14 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Upon his return to the United States, plaintiff was detained, placed in removal proceedings, and incarcerated for approximately four months. [read post]
10 Jul 2012, 7:47 am by Nissenbaum Law Group
The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently addressed this question in Sloan v. [read post]
10 Jul 2012, 7:51 am by Nissenbaum Law Group
The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently addressed this question in Sloan v. [read post]
5 Jun 2007, 10:43 pm
United States, 350 U.S. 162, 166 n. 9 (1956).. . .There is a split in the federal circuit courts concerning the standard to be used to determine whether a shipper's damages claim is sufficient. [read post]
8 Jun 2011, 10:14 am by John Steele
  (h/t: Patently-O)  Syllaubs: This purpose of this essay is to provide an early analysis of some of the most substantial law and policy concerns raised by the very recent en banc decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in the now famous Therasense v. [read post]