Search for: "Direct Sales Co. v. United States" Results 1 - 20 of 733
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Aug 2019, 1:28 pm
Apple moved to dismiss, arguing that the iPhone owners could not sue be­cause they were not direct purchasers from Apple under Illinois Brick Co. v. [read post]
15 Aug 2019, 11:24 pm by MOTP
The first loan states:I acknowledge that the requested loan is subject to the limitations on dischargeability in bankruptcy contained in Section 523(a)(8) of the United States Bankruptcy Code. [read post]
26 Jun 2019, 3:24 pm by John Elwood
United States, 18-7833 Issues: (1) Whether a post-2002 conviction for sale of cocaine or possession of cocaine with intent to sell in violation [read post]
14 Jun 2019, 10:10 am by Scott R. Anderson
Such a resolution would, under the AECA, prohibit the president from moving forward with the sale unless he certified to Congress that “an emergency exist[ed] which require[d] such sale in the national security interests of the United States. [read post]
7 Jun 2019, 6:53 am by PaulKostro
That doctrine was first recognized by the United States Supreme Court in Hickman v. [read post]
29 May 2019, 9:01 pm by Samuel Estreicher
United States is a direct consequence of the Jobs Act amendment to section 5000A of the ACA. [read post]
21 May 2019, 11:57 pm by Florian Mueller
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) of the United States has won the first round of litigation against Qualcomm. [read post]
These developments impact many SaaS providers, especially due to the expanded nexus provisions that many states are enacting after the United States Supreme Court’s South Dakota v. [read post]
16 May 2019, 12:15 pm by Eric Caligiuri
As an early defense in the case, Apple asserted that the consumer plaintiffs could not sue Apple because they supposedly were not “direct purchasers” from Apple under Illinois Brick Co. v. [read post]
12 May 2019, 1:01 pm by Benjamin Wittes
He named Nixon as an unindicted co-conspirator in that case. [read post]