Search for: "FISH v. STATE"
Results 1901 - 1920
of 3,432
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Apr 2014, 12:30 pm
California Department of Fish and Game, et al. [read post]
Appellate Court Shuts Out Trial Court in CEQA/ESA Double Header under Deferential Standard of Review
3 Apr 2014, 11:08 am
Both federal and state environmental review were necessitated for the project, however the appellate court only reviewed the relevant state law issues. [read post]
31 Mar 2014, 4:27 pm
Department of Fish and Wildlife, Court of Appeal of the State of California, Second Appellate District, Division Five, Case No. [read post]
31 Mar 2014, 4:27 pm
Department of Fish and Wildlife, Court of Appeal of the State of California, Second Appellate District, Division Five, Case No. [read post]
31 Mar 2014, 7:36 am
United States, the U.S. [read post]
28 Mar 2014, 5:33 pm
MagSil Corp. v. [read post]
27 Mar 2014, 9:30 pm
Supreme Court heard oral argument in Sebelius v. [read post]
27 Mar 2014, 5:07 pm
Center for Biological Diversity v. [read post]
26 Mar 2014, 10:00 pm
McMillan v. [read post]
20 Mar 2014, 12:32 pm
Fifty years ago, in New York Times v. [read post]
20 Mar 2014, 6:00 am
Edith Wilmans of Dallas—to hear the case of Johnson v. [read post]
19 Mar 2014, 1:31 pm
In Pearson v. [read post]
16 Mar 2014, 7:19 pm
[…] Additionally, the specification of the Asserted Patents discloses the use of a fish-eye lens, […] and “fish-eye views,” […]. [read post]
14 Mar 2014, 8:49 am
Fish and Wildlife Service that concluded that the Central Valley and State Water Projects jeopardized the continued existence of the delta smelt and its habitat. [read post]
7 Mar 2014, 10:33 am
Indeed, while under Article 52(1)(a) CTMR the application date is the seminal moment for the examination invalidity grounds, examiners and Courts are free to consider any material subsequent to the date of application insofar as it enables conclusions to be drawn with regard to the situation as it was on that date [see the CJEU’s orders in Alcon v OHIM, in Case C-192/03P, and Torresan v OHIM, in Case C-5/10]. [read post]
6 Mar 2014, 4:31 am
In Root v. [read post]
5 Mar 2014, 5:15 am
Otherwise, I assume that this exercise is a fishing expedition and would remind you of your obligations to the Court. [read post]
4 Mar 2014, 11:41 am
United States v. [read post]
26 Feb 2014, 12:36 pm
Lorin and U.S. v. [read post]
25 Feb 2014, 8:27 am
On American Chemistry Council v. [read post]
