Search for: "United States v. Felt"
Results 1741 - 1760
of 2,646
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Feb 2019, 6:29 am
Finally, the doctrinal reason for not having the military commission review these two additional violations is found in United States v. [read post]
3 May 2017, 4:50 am
In United States v. [read post]
7 Feb 2022, 4:00 am
He also showed a wicked sense of humor in United States v. [read post]
28 Jul 2010, 1:30 pm
(iii) The defendant was involved in the importation into the United States of a controlled substance. [read post]
5 Apr 2011, 1:00 am
Thus R. v. [read post]
12 Dec 2016, 6:57 am
As noted by Judge Warner’s strong dissent in the linked-to case above: The right to marry is a fundamental right, protected by the United States Constitution. [read post]
6 Aug 2018, 11:43 am
His influence on constitutional law can still be felt today as well. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 2:46 am
There was still no infringement or passing off so far as SCRABBLE v SCRAMBLE was concerned, however. [read post]
2 Apr 2009, 9:50 am
Hypo 2: United States v. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 2:11 pm
(See Phelps v. [read post]
23 Jun 2010, 5:56 am
United States); McDonald, the Chicago gun rights case; and a couple of big First Amendment cases. [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 10:32 am
Co. v. [read post]
10 Jul 2015, 4:30 am
§337(a), which provides that the United States is supposed to enforce violations of the FDCA. [read post]
19 Jan 2010, 5:32 pm
The SBWC ruled in favor of United, as did the Appellate Division of the State Board. [read post]
26 Jun 2016, 5:11 pm
United States Supreme Court, June 2015, the United States Supreme Court ruled that it takes more than a “reasonable person” standard to prove criminal liability. [read post]
15 Aug 2013, 1:54 am
In late July the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a "final" (but not final-final) Office action rejecting all claims of the '915 patent. [read post]
6 May 2011, 3:46 pm
” Although the Sherman Anti-trust Act had been passed in 1890, the United States Supreme Court decision of U.S. v. [read post]
19 Aug 2022, 6:34 am
§ 332 states, “Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may … use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion” (emphasis added). [read post]
25 Mar 2011, 9:23 am
The United States Supreme Court enunciated this presumption in Troxel v. [read post]
4 Feb 2009, 9:48 am
But what began as a discussion about specific sexual harassment opinions seemed to transform into a debate over the state of feminism in the United States. [read post]
