Search for: "Caming v. United States" Results 1881 - 1900 of 9,166
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Nov 2021, 10:32 am by Ronald Mann
ShareYou might have expected the justices to take a breather the day after hearing the weighty arguments in United States v. [read post]
6 Mar 2017, 8:46 am by Quinta Jurecic
  The United States Embassy in Libya suspended its operations in 2014. [read post]
27 Feb 2014, 6:21 am by Amy Howe
 In United States v. [read post]
15 Nov 2018, 1:20 pm
Import: Section 337:Trademark:Registered mark, Common-law mark:Secondary meaning:Word mark: Product-packaging trade dress: Product-design trade dress:Restatement (Third) of Unfair Competition:Appeal from the United States International Trade Commission in Investigation No. 337-TA-936.Section 337 provides a remedy at the ITC for, among other things, “the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United… [read post]
13 Mar 2007, 5:07 pm
This summary accompanies the oral argument video:Pursuant to Indiana Appellate Rule 64, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana certified the following questions of Indiana state law for the Indiana Supreme Court's consideration, which the Indiana Supreme Court accepted on February 22, 2006: 1. [read post]
22 Dec 2023, 9:30 pm by ernst
   From In Custodia Legis: "A history of blasphemy laws in the United States"; "Clara Barton and the Geneva Convention. [read post]
14 Dec 2016, 10:01 am by Quinta Jurecic
That year, the Court handed down Hamdan v. [read post]
13 Nov 2009, 10:20 am
PREPARED BY: Michael Chernicoff Looser Rules on Sentencing Stir Concerns About Equity [online.wsj.com] The Supreme Court cases of The United State v. [read post]
1 Jul 2018, 9:01 pm by Sherry F. Colb
The Court has applied the doctrine to bank records, in United States v. [read post]
24 Apr 2018, 10:41 am by Susan Klein
Responding to the government’s argument that the Supreme Court has on previous occasions recognized that a sentencing reduction based upon Section 3582(c)(2) is not governed by the constitutional or remedial holding of United States v. [read post]