Search for: "United States v. Michigan"
Results 1781 - 1800
of 3,728
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Sep 2013, 10:28 am
Under the Lanham Act, a federal law, the holder of a mark may ask the United States Patent and Trademark Office to register the mark on the principal register. [read post]
6 Sep 2013, 5:18 am
United States. [read post]
5 Sep 2013, 9:16 am
Appealed from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. [read post]
5 Sep 2013, 9:14 am
Appealed from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. [read post]
5 Sep 2013, 4:42 am
California and United States v. [read post]
4 Sep 2013, 1:06 pm
Appealed from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. [read post]
4 Sep 2013, 12:57 pm
With this background, we recently read the State of Michigan’s opening brief in Michigan v. [read post]
3 Sep 2013, 1:26 pm
On Remand From The United States Supreme Court [See WIMS 3/21/13]. [read post]
3 Sep 2013, 9:01 am
United States v. [read post]
30 Aug 2013, 7:57 am
The opening brief in Michigan v. [read post]
30 Aug 2013, 7:57 am
The opening brief in Michigan v. [read post]
21 Aug 2013, 11:28 am
Resources: Federal Child Pornography Law State of Michigan, Child Pornography Law: MCL 750.145c [read post]
20 Aug 2013, 2:31 pm
United States, which teaches us that bankruptcy law uses state law inputs regarding property rights. [read post]
15 Aug 2013, 3:07 pm
In Selo v. [read post]
15 Aug 2013, 9:19 am
In Yaman v. [read post]
15 Aug 2013, 6:57 am
Following a bench trial, the United States District Court for the District of Vermont ruled in plaintiffs' favor on the Atomic Energy Act preemption claim and the dormant Commerce Clause claim, and found that the Federal Power Act preemption claim was not ripe. [read post]
13 Aug 2013, 1:15 pm
United States ex rel. [read post]
12 Aug 2013, 1:30 pm
v. [read post]
9 Aug 2013, 1:24 pm
On Remand From The United States Supreme Court [In Los Angeles Cnty. [read post]
9 Aug 2013, 10:05 am
To have jurisdiction over a case, a federal court must find that the plaintiffs satisfy Article III of the United States Constitution, including by alleging that they have suffered an injury-in-fact. [read post]
