Search for: "US v. Under Seal"
Results 161 - 180
of 2,370
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 May 2015, 10:35 am
The case is SanMedica International v. [read post]
9 Jul 2021, 4:57 pm
See, e.g., Oliver v. [read post]
[Eugene Volokh] No Sealing of Case Based on "Defendant['s] … Damaging Assertions Against Plaintiffs"
11 Nov 2020, 5:01 am
Bluth (N.Y. trial ct.) in Choi v. [read post]
21 Mar 2011, 4:00 am
I chose the case of the day, Starski v. [read post]
9 Nov 2016, 6:48 am
State v. [read post]
5 Nov 2007, 10:53 am
If not appropriate for dredging work, it is difficult to imagine when sealed bidding ought to be used. [read post]
9 Jul 2007, 2:18 am
US v. [read post]
3 Aug 2023, 1:01 am
West v. [read post]
14 Jan 2015, 7:27 am
In 2011, the US Supreme Court in AT&T Mobility v. [read post]
18 Aug 2017, 10:21 am
Cir. 2017) In a prior post, I noted that the Federal Circuit initially released this appellate decision under seal but requested that the parties show cause as to why it should remain under seal. [read post]
6 Apr 2012, 8:43 pm
Also, kudos to Laurent for having the prescience to put this panel together before the Supreme Court granted cert. in not one but two dog sniff cases, both out of Florida (where SEALS happens to be meeting this year): Florida v. [read post]
22 Nov 2010, 1:37 pm
Saller v. [read post]
28 Jan 2019, 10:38 am
The letter states that certain documents should be filed under seal, but notes that the sentencing transcript is not filed under seal. [read post]
10 Sep 2013, 6:03 am
(As a U.S. government agency, the NSA has no copyright in its logo either, under 17 U.S.C. [read post]
17 Jan 2022, 1:38 pm
(The former terminology “under seal” is no longer used in the current version of the rule.) [read post]
2 Mar 2020, 9:18 am
Attempts to unseal can work even years after the sealing, see, e.g., EEOC v. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 10:01 am
United States v. [read post]
9 Jul 2009, 11:04 am
Hernandez v. [read post]
27 Oct 2016, 9:20 am
Alaska Oil & Gas Assn. v. [read post]
23 Jan 2024, 11:28 am
The Court concluded that, under the Second Circuit's decision in Publicola v. [read post]
