Search for: "Holder v. United States"
Results 1901 - 1920
of 4,276
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Jan 2015, 9:49 pm
See buySAFE, Inc. v. [read post]
7 Jan 2015, 10:52 am
State Water Contractors v. [read post]
2 Jan 2015, 9:40 pm
Procedural HistoryIn April 2008, SSL filed suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas alleging that Citrix’s GoTo Products infringe claim 27 of the ‘796 Patent. [read post]
2 Jan 2015, 12:28 pm
Holder, one of several recent cases in which the Court has scrutinized the federal government’s efforts to remove a lawful permanent resident from the United States based on a minor drug conviction. [read post]
2 Jan 2015, 10:47 am
This post reviews some of the highlights of the court battles of 2014 in Canada and other Commonwealth countries, the United States and the European Union. [read post]
2 Jan 2015, 6:30 am
First a word about the plaintiff: Some Kat readers may recall that Pom Wonderful prevailed in a closely watched decision given by the United States Supreme Court on June 12, 2014, Pom Wonderful LLC v Coca Cola Company. [read post]
27 Dec 2014, 2:19 am
More from Europe: In Case C-355/12 Nintendo v PC Box the CJEU said that circumventing a protection system may not be unlawful. [read post]
23 Dec 2014, 7:25 am
In Decon Group, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Dec 2014, 1:33 pm
More than three years later, in March 2010, the wife filed a chapter 7 bankruptcy case in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA), Norfolk Division. [read post]
18 Dec 2014, 9:17 am
., Inc. v. [read post]
17 Dec 2014, 9:59 am
Holder, 379 U.S. 104, 119 (1964). [read post]
8 Dec 2014, 5:52 am
United Tactical Systems v. [read post]
7 Dec 2014, 3:10 pm
” The report examines the practices concerning this question in the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and the United States. [read post]
4 Dec 2014, 9:35 pm
But they still haven't put the U.S. part of the dispute behind them.Yesterday the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard Samsung's appeal of the district court ruling in the first Apple v. [read post]
3 Dec 2014, 9:54 am
And a federal court has recently agreed, because on April 10, 2014, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California ruled that A’lor is barred from infringing CHARRIOL cable trademarks by selling ALOR jewelry that uses such cable. [read post]
30 Nov 2014, 8:18 am
See Holder v. [read post]
25 Nov 2014, 12:13 pm
In Shelby County v. [read post]
25 Nov 2014, 6:08 am
United States v. [read post]
25 Nov 2014, 6:08 am
United States v. [read post]
