Search for: "Lofgren v. Lofgren"
Results 41 - 60
of 84
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Nov 2011, 1:21 pm
Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), Rep. [read post]
4 Dec 2014, 7:16 am
King was followed by Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), who testified that allowing cameras in the federal courts would give the public greater insight into the judicial process and build public confidence in that process. [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 1:51 pm
Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), expressly permitted objections based on section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. [read post]
23 Oct 2019, 9:01 pm
J. 131 (2013) in King v. [read post]
3 Mar 2012, 5:36 pm
Wheelahan v. [read post]
18 Apr 2016, 5:37 pm
Luis V. [read post]
12 Jun 2013, 8:15 am
., Lofgren v. [read post]
10 Jul 2012, 7:49 am
Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) called this latest WIPO transgression "an outrage. [read post]
10 Jul 2012, 7:49 am
Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) called this latest WIPO transgression "an outrage. [read post]
20 Sep 2019, 6:00 am
The House Judiciary Committee held a hearing Sept. 18 on oversight of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), examining specifically whether to reauthorize four provisions of the act set to expire in December. [read post]
18 Mar 2011, 10:04 am
Wheelahan v. [read post]
27 Dec 2016, 8:16 am
In a March decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Smith v. [read post]
5 Mar 2014, 4:21 pm
Jacobsen v. [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 12:57 pm
” Best v. [read post]
19 Sep 2018, 12:40 pm
Friends of Riverside’s Hills v. [read post]
29 Jan 2020, 5:22 pm
But the landmark 2018 Supreme Court decision in Carpenter v. [read post]
24 Feb 2022, 5:01 am
In McGrain v. [read post]
17 Apr 2016, 3:57 pm
Expressing frustration at two examples - Apple v Kodak and Broadcom v Qualcomm. [read post]
10 Feb 2014, 3:35 pm
The American Public Health Association (APHA) is a significant organization ostensibly committed to the improvement of public health. [read post]
18 May 2009, 5:24 am
’ (China Law Blog) Europe ECJ finds similar marks on wine and glasses not likely to cause confusion: Waterford Wedgewood plc v Assembled Investments (Proprietary) Ltd, OHIM (Class 46) (IPKat) AG Colomer opines in Maple leaf trade mark battle: joined cases American Clothing Associates SA v OHIM and OHIM v American Clothing Associates SA (IPKat) (Excess Copyright) CFI: Restitutio and time limits: how does the law stand now for CTMs? [read post]
