Search for: "In re Cooper, Petitioner"
Results 81 - 100
of 245
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Jun 2014, 8:45 am
Petitioners challenge the Memorandum re: the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule on procedural and substantive grounds. [read post]
30 Apr 2023, 12:37 am
The former concerns the application of data on the PV panels on the North Roof of the chapel, on which there was disagreement between the Petitioners and the CBC. [read post]
19 Jan 2012, 7:29 am
—or perhaps the memos are still flying trying to resolve how they’re going to dispose of the case. [read post]
5 Oct 2011, 4:53 pm
As long as we’re talking about constitutional criminal procedure, Blueford v. [read post]
17 Sep 2023, 5:11 pm
Virtually all of which require some level of cooperation between the parties. [read post]
9 Oct 2018, 11:57 pm
(2) Is the enactment of a zoning ordinance allowing the operation of medical marijuana cooperatives in certain areas the type of activity that may cause a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment? [read post]
8 Nov 2019, 2:18 pm
And we’ve handled many cases that have taken several years to conclude and tens of thousands of dollars that a litigant has spent to get a great result, but most cases for most folks, you’re going to get a better result if we take a more cooperative approach at the onset, and if need be, turn on the aggressive switch a bit later. [read post]
23 Aug 2022, 5:00 am
The trial court rejected all of Petitioners claims and Petitioners appealed. [read post]
10 Apr 2014, 2:20 pm
And on that lyric note, we’re done for the week. [read post]
2 Aug 2021, 12:19 am
” Edelman’s counsel’s response stated without elaboration that his client “consents to the court issuing a decision as soon as practicable directing all relief sought in Petitioner’s petitioner to be dismissed with prejudice. [read post]
15 Jan 2019, 7:41 pm
(2) Is the enactment of a zoning ordinance allowing the operation of medical marijuana cooperatives in certain areas the type of activity that may cause a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment? [read post]
16 Jul 2015, 7:25 am
All unnamed movants are relieved of any duty to cooperate further with the investigation. [read post]
15 Jun 2023, 12:16 am
Petitioners’ case summary “[3]. [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 1:01 am
(2) Is the enactment of a zoning ordinance allowing the operation of medical marijuana cooperatives in certain areas the type of activity that may cause a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment? [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 1:01 am
(2) Is the enactment of a zoning ordinance allowing the operation of medical marijuana cooperatives in certain areas the type of activity that may cause a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment? [read post]
18 Jul 2010, 5:00 am
Going back to the Supreme Court eBay case, recall the Brief of petitioner, eBay, presented to the Supreme Court [by (among others) Jeffrey G. [read post]
1 Dec 2010, 3:25 am
Hot Springs Advertising & Promotion Commission, Cancellation No. 92049191 [Section 2(e)(2) petition for cancellation of a registration for the mark shown below for "creating advertising for publications or direct mail advertising; cooperative advertising and marketing; displaying advertisements for others; and dissemination of advertising for others" on the ground that the mark is primarily geographically descriptive].December 16, 2010 - 2 PM: Hunt Control Systems, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Dec 2006, 9:44 am
" The complaint also outlines Swift's efforts to cooperate with ICE investigations and comply with the INA. [read post]
3 Jul 2011, 8:58 am
Petitioner’s execution would cause irreparable harm to those interests by placing the United States in irremediable breach of its international-law obligation, imposed by the ICJ’s judgment in Avena, to provide judicial review of petitioner’s Vienna Convention claim. [read post]
15 Feb 2010, 2:20 pm
United States Docket: 09-293 Issue: Whether a litigant moving to re-open a suppression hearing to introduce additional evidence must justify his failure to introduce that evidence at the initial hearing. [read post]
