Search for: "United States v. Gooding" Results 1601 - 1620 of 18,630
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Sep 2008, 8:47 am by stu@crimapp.com
A good example of this principle is shown in the Court’s 2006 decision in Carey v Musladin. [read post]
26 Jan 2007, 3:48 pm
See, e.g., United States v. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 9:44 am by Perry J. Browder
Without a ban in place, the United States has continued to import more than 375,000 metric tons of asbestos to be used in commercial products, putting American citizens at risk for exposure. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 9:15 am
Nicholas Louis Geranio, Keith Michael Field, The Good One, Inc., and Kaleidoscope Real Estate, Inc.Case number: 12-cv-04257 (United States District Court for the Central District of California)Case filed: May 16, 2012Qualifying judgment/order: November 1, 2013 12/20/2013 03/20/2014 2013-119 SEC v. [read post]
24 Feb 2007, 4:54 am
Patent problems in patent law - pdf (see this earlier post) THE PATENT SYSTEM in the United States is so dysfunctional that it can even generate sympathy for Microsoft. […] The purpose of patents, like copyrights, is to promote innovation by giving inventors exclusive rights to use and distribute their creations for a limited time. [read post]
31 Dec 2020, 10:28 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Utah Dep’t of Corr., 79 F.3d 1024, 1029–30 (10th Cir. 1996) (quoting United States v. [read post]
30 Nov 2010, 11:59 pm by Orin Kerr
(Orin Kerr) Back on September 10, I had a long post criticizing some dicta in a wiretapping opinion by Judge Easterbrook: The Perils of Interpreting Statutes With Multiple Remedial Schemes: A Comment on the Dicta in United States v. [read post]
5 Nov 2014, 5:12 pm by LTA-Editor
By Nicholas Ulrich A year ago, the Third Circuit in United States v. [read post]
9 Jul 2013, 3:13 pm by David S. Jones
An employer who failed to complete an I-9 Employment Eligibility Verification Form within three days of an employee’s start date commits a substantive violation for which the good faith defense is not available to mitigate the assessed fine, according to a recent ruling from the Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer (OCAHO) of the Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review, in United States of America v. [read post]