Search for: "He v. Holder"
Results 1501 - 1520
of 5,732
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Aug 2013, 3:35 am
U.S. v. [read post]
25 May 2010, 10:15 am
This would be similar to LaRussa v. [read post]
27 Dec 2017, 6:41 pm
He notes that the “appeal of a top down approach is that it prevents royalty stacking”, which occurs when individual SEP holders each demand a royalty that, when combined, can be excessive (p.15). [read post]
9 Dec 2019, 8:35 am
Bank v. [read post]
13 Sep 2021, 11:55 am
(CSIRO) v. [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 10:00 am
Holder, 571 F.3d 524, 525 (6th Cir. 2009) (au contraire); Malta-Espinoza v. [read post]
5 Feb 2015, 1:44 pm
Ga. 2003) (applying Georgia law), there was no liability:[T]he plaintiff alleges the existence of an affirmative duty to warn which arises merely from being the developer, inventor, or patent holder of a product or design. [read post]
25 Jun 2018, 2:23 pm
., Bull v. [read post]
18 Jul 2022, 6:02 am
Pennsylvania State Univ. v. [read post]
9 Mar 2015, 1:48 pm
The Court said that the holder of the “executive right” – the right to grant oil and gas leases – has a duty “to acquire for the non-executive [the royalty owner] every benefit that he exacts for himself,” but that “the executive is not required to grant priority to the non-executive’s interest. [read post]
18 May 2015, 11:01 am
On that day, Holder said his thank you to the Chief Justice and was heading out the door even as Roberts announced that he had the opinion in a case captioned Nken v. [read post]
9 Nov 2020, 4:41 am
” “Notwithstanding the above, the court finds unconvincing defendants’ argument that they were obligated to withdraw after their investigation showed that the underlying tort claim was without merit (~ee Willis v Holder, 43 AD3d 1441, 1441 [4th Dept 2007] [conclusory assertiori that the underlying action lacks merit is insufficient to establish good and sufficient cause for withdrawal]). [read post]
5 Oct 2007, 11:21 am
Somerset Pharmaceuticals v. [read post]
1 Feb 2013, 3:36 am
Remember Case C-462/09 Thiuskopie v Opus?]. [read post]
11 Jan 2022, 5:00 am
In the bylaws, Lockup Shares were defined as “the shares of Class A common stock held by the Lock-up Holders immediately following the Business Combination Transaction. [read post]
28 Apr 2015, 8:51 am
Walro v. [read post]
26 Jun 2017, 10:30 am
The defendant in New Jersey v. [read post]
11 Oct 2014, 6:55 am
Holder on Wednesday, and gave an overview of the trial so far. [read post]
13 Feb 2016, 12:01 am
You can read more about how Shelby County v. [read post]
3 Feb 2024, 9:52 am
For present purposes, however, the important point to understand is that Trump’s primary merits argument, to which he devotes the first 13 pages of the Argument section of his brief (pp. 20-33), concerns only the second, middle “Officials Clause,” which identifies the current and former office-holders to whom Section 3 potentially applies, rather than the government positions that an insurrectionist or rebel is ineligible to occupy going forward. [read post]
