Search for: "Query v. U.s.*"
Results 81 - 100
of 202
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Aug 2017, 12:46 pm
On August 18, 2017, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in United States v. [read post]
23 Jun 2017, 10:27 am
Patton explains that all of the accompanying documents address Section 702 of FISA, that no documents responsive to the query have been withheld, and that within the week he will provide an estimate of when the next batch of documents will be ready. [read post]
16 May 2017, 8:03 am
Mandel (1972), or Kerry v. [read post]
10 May 2017, 10:41 am
In Cisco Systems v. [read post]
5 May 2017, 1:45 pm
In one message, Church queried MV1 whether MV2 was asleep. [read post]
4 May 2017, 9:34 am
In Blue Spike v. [read post]
3 Apr 2017, 7:22 am
Paleteria La Michoacana, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Mar 2017, 9:36 am
The Ninth finds the government meets that standard, here).United States v. [read post]
23 Mar 2017, 6:08 am
However, Katz v. [read post]
21 Mar 2017, 9:31 am
Part II focuses on the new CIA guidelines and their treatment of publicly available information and related issues, including bulk collection, querying, retention and dissemination, and undisclosed participation in organizations inside the United States. [read post]
15 Mar 2017, 4:28 pm
A fitting starting point is a case many lawyers are familiar with: Rector, Etc. of Holy Trinity Church v. [read post]
27 Feb 2017, 5:10 pm
This morning, the Supreme Court heard arguments in Esquivel-Quintana v. [read post]
19 Jan 2017, 8:09 am
Slep-Tone Entertainment Corp. v. [read post]
8 Sep 2016, 7:18 am
In NLRB v. [read post]
8 Jul 2016, 3:46 pm
” (Query: why would the TTAB ruling be admissible now? [read post]
Has the government been using its copy service to spy on defense work product for the past 10 years?
3 Jun 2016, 6:30 am
But query why it took 10 years for any prosecutor or agent to speak up. [read post]
24 May 2016, 10:20 am
Case citation: E-ventures Worldwide, LLC v. [read post]
7 May 2016, 6:56 pm
Probably United States v. [read post]
29 Apr 2016, 3:54 am
" Review under Campbell v Acuff-Rose frameworkThe court reviewed the purpose and character of Google Books’ uses under Campbell’s framework. [read post]
27 Apr 2016, 3:05 pm
Depending upon how the statute is interpreted, this setup appears to create a presumption of injunctive relief – a stark difference from contemporary patent law doctrine under eBay v. [read post]
