Search for: "Sellers v. United States"
Results 141 - 160
of 1,424
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Jun 2007, 11:27 am
However, in the United States, we have 50 states (akin to provinces in other countries) that have their own local laws governing statewide trademark registration, unfair competition and other issues. [read post]
20 Dec 2023, 12:03 pm
CDC Newburgh Inc. v. [read post]
13 Jul 2018, 1:57 pm
United States Dist. [read post]
13 Jun 2024, 8:52 pm
United States will require closely-held business owners to reconsider their current buy-sell arrangement in order to avoid additional federal estate tax. [read post]
1 Feb 2018, 4:00 am
A recent case from the United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals illustrates the legal repercussions that can befall a home-seller when he or she withholds certain deficiencies in the condition of the home. [read post]
1 Feb 2018, 4:00 am
A recent case from the United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals illustrates the legal repercussions that can befall a home-seller when he or she withholds certain deficiencies in the condition of the home. [read post]
19 Jun 2018, 7:09 am
Facts: This case (WHITE et al v. [read post]
29 Jun 2018, 11:01 am
On June 21, 2018, the United States Supreme Court overruled the “physical presence” bright-line rule for substantial nexus in its landmark decision South Dakota v. [read post]
15 Feb 2022, 1:58 pm
United States v. [read post]
5 Apr 2024, 10:13 am
The lower court cited three anti-browsewrap precedents: Sellers v. [read post]
28 Aug 2011, 8:16 am
United States v. [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 8:00 am
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has issued the long-awaited decision in the case 08-964 Bilski et.al. v. [read post]
12 Mar 2012, 12:08 pm
” The decision provides important clarification on the standard laid out by the United States Supreme Court in Morrison v. [read post]
9 Mar 2023, 9:05 pm
Fang, V. [read post]
25 Apr 2023, 11:24 am
Warren v. [read post]
19 Jul 2024, 8:16 am
Stiner v. [read post]
29 Apr 2008, 9:54 am
On the merits, the Federal Circuit rejected the contention that because legal title to the products changed in Canada that there was not a "sale" in the United States as contemplated by § 271(a), given that the customer was in the United States and the products were shipped there. [read post]
7 Apr 2008, 11:31 am
Co. v. [read post]
7 Apr 2008, 6:31 pm
Co. v. [read post]
7 Oct 2009, 11:58 am
But some states like New York will look at them under the same test - meaning counsel must tailor them narrowly to protect an employer's business interest. -- Court: United States District Court for the Southern District of New York Opinion Date: 10/1/09 Cite: Cenveo Corp. v. [read post]
