Search for: "US v. Contreras" Results 101 - 120 of 160
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Apr 2015, 6:10 am by Matt Kaiser
The Fifth Circuit ordered the district court to narrowly interpret certain restrictions that it had imposed on the Appellant’s use of the Internet, holding, for example, that requiring Appellant to secure written permission each time he used the Internet would be unreasonably restrictive. 10. [read post]
19 Feb 2021, 2:30 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
Translational similarity may be a special case where consumers react differently [v. my example of the UNC and University of Wisconsin cases in the US where the PTO said that consumers had stubbornly continued to perceive the marks as indicating a single source despite over 100 years, in the former case, of uncontrolled use]. [read post]
14 Jul 2011, 1:30 pm by Aaron Pelley
Contreras drove the vehicle to a licensing station to attempt to relicense the vehicle using false VIN tags from his old car. [read post]
23 Jan 2014, 5:08 am by Kit Case
In 2013 one employee fraud case did crack the Top Ten, so the record is now 49-1 (employer fraud v. employee fraud) over the past five years. [read post]
12 Mar 2016, 7:44 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Contreras, “Private Ordering or Public Law? [read post]
1 Dec 2019, 7:09 am by Florian Mueller
"Another way SEP holders earn revenue from their inventions is by licensing them for use in others' products (e.g., licensing Qualcomm's SEPs for use in a handset with an Intel chip). [read post]
21 Jun 2016, 11:05 am by ALDF
That was the message from the Oregon Supreme Court last week when it issued its ruling in State v. [read post]
12 May 2010, 7:02 pm by Erin Miller
Opinion below (9th Circuit) Petition for certiorari Brief in opposition Petitioner’s reply Amicus brief of the Pacific Legal Foundation Amicus brief of the Bay Planning Coalition and the California Building Industry Association Title: Contreras-Martinez v. [read post]
21 Nov 2015, 6:44 am by John Ehrett
Contreras 15-58Issue: (1) Whether the Fourth Amendment’s reasonableness standard requires that a suspect threaten a police officer with a weapon before the police officer can use deadly force to apprehend the suspect, or whether Tennessee v. [read post]