Search for: "Quick v. United States"
Results 1141 - 1160
of 2,102
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Oct 2020, 1:21 pm
In United States v. [read post]
8 Jan 2024, 6:55 am
United States, where former President Donald Trump will try to convince the U.S. [read post]
7 May 2024, 9:31 am
This is recognized in the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) at 9 FAM § 402.1-3 , which states that an “applicant desiring to come to the United States for one principal purpose, and one or more incidental purposes, must be classified in accordance with the principal purpose. [read post]
20 Feb 2013, 5:00 pm
The Washington Supreme Court's decision in Bylsma v. [read post]
22 Sep 2009, 5:51 am
Francis v. [read post]
14 Dec 2011, 11:19 am
Pappert (pdf, pp. 77-79) and its reliance on the Supreme Court decision of United States v. [read post]
27 Aug 2015, 12:35 am
But a tipping point may have been reached at which conservation will come to an end even in her district court.A few days ago the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied Samsung's motion to stay issuance of a mandate (pending a Supreme Court petition) following a recent appellate ruling on the first California Apple v. [read post]
22 Nov 2014, 11:18 am
”) United States v. [read post]
24 May 2014, 10:23 am
The United States is very unlikely to come up with any similar ruling, largely because of our First Amendment free speech legal tradition. [read post]
18 Jan 2016, 7:46 pm
Last month, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied Samsung's petition for an injunction rehearing relating to the second Apple v. [read post]
16 Sep 2023, 8:16 am
August 25, 2023 decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in FTC v. [read post]
22 May 2016, 6:06 pm
"BFP v. [read post]
8 Feb 2012, 7:45 am
Since the landmark case of Jones v. [read post]
17 Mar 2025, 9:36 am
[T]hose people need to be returned to the United States. [read post]
18 Nov 2009, 8:31 am
The decision was an exception to the United States Supreme Court decision in April 2008 in Baze v. [read post]
16 Sep 2019, 3:33 pm
Government in its Samsung v. [read post]
19 Jul 2017, 3:39 am
United States, 533 U.S. 27, 121 S. [read post]
25 Jun 2013, 6:52 am
The judges observed that the Hatch-Waxman Act appears to be very sensitive to antitrust concerns, and cited several cases (inter alia, United States v Singer Mfg. [read post]
14 Aug 2019, 7:32 am
Com’rs of Brevard Cnty. v. [read post]
29 Nov 2016, 8:38 am
This time the decision is from the United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the First Circuit (“BAP”). [read post]
