Search for: "Leahy v. Leahy"
Results 1 - 20
of 784
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Nov 2011, 12:49 pm
Here is the abstract: Forty-five years after it was decided, Escott v. [read post]
6 Feb 2009, 10:52 am
Senate Bill (Leahy) Would Strengthen Securities Fraud and Financial Fraud EnforcementA bill to improve enforcement of securities fraud and financial institution fraud involving asset-backed securities and fraud related to federal assistance and relief programs was introduced by Senator Patrick Leahy, chair of the Judiciary Committee. [read post]
25 Feb 2014, 10:28 am
Alschuler (University of Chicago Law School) has posted Terrible Tools for Prosecutors: Notes on Senator Leahy's Proposal to 'Fix' Skilling v. [read post]
15 Nov 2017, 12:05 pm
In Wednesday's confirmation hearing, Leahy suggested that the bacon tweet showed Willett's disdain for the Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. [read post]
23 Sep 2021, 6:56 am
Several other outlets have reported that either Leahy himself or sources on the Hill confirmed such a bill is in the works and will address discretionary denial practice at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) under the PTAB’s precedential Apple Inc. v. [read post]
13 Jul 2011, 8:49 am
Tags: Schools for Misrule, Senate, Supreme Court Related posts Wyeth v. [read post]
1 Jul 2010, 3:15 am
With patent reform seemingly on the back burner yet again, Senator Leahy stands on the In re Bilski soap box to rally supporters Monday, noting: In Bilski v. [read post]
29 Jul 2014, 4:21 pm
Leahy’s bill is important because, well, it’s not just Leahy’s bill. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 9:45 am
Chief Justice John Roberts cited that assurance in his opinion for the court, Nken v. [read post]
5 Aug 2014, 11:23 am
Admittedly, I’m no fan of the reasoning of Camreta v. [read post]
12 Sep 2012, 11:01 am
Leahy, for example, delivered one of his oft-repeated lines regarding the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. [read post]
30 Jul 2014, 1:26 pm
See United States v. [read post]
23 Sep 2021, 6:56 am
Several other outlets have reported that either Leahy himself or sources on the Hill confirmed such a bill is in the works and will address discretionary denial practice at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) under the PTAB’s precedential Apple Inc. v. [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 10:09 am
Well, except for the fact that Illinois v. [read post]
1 Oct 2010, 8:03 am
This is the statute that was at issue in Skilling v. [read post]
31 Jul 2014, 7:54 am
Usually, the case-or-controversy requirement shows up in appellate review by requiring that the appellant have Article III standing to appeal–the very defect that proved fatal to the Prop. 8 proponents in the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Hollingsworth v. [read post]
30 Sep 2021, 1:43 pm
As reported previously, the bill would essentially end discretionary denial practice under precedential Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) cases such as Apple Inc. v. [read post]
28 Oct 2008, 4:07 pm
Cheryl Hanna (Vermont Law School) has posted Beechman v. [read post]
7 Dec 2011, 9:36 am
See, for example, Metallizing Engineering Co. v. [read post]
5 Aug 2014, 12:20 am
See Shadwick v. [read post]
