Search for: "Rodriguez v. Superior Court"
Results 121 - 140
of 162
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Oct 2014, 8:11 am
Superior Court was on point. [read post]
17 Sep 2021, 5:01 am
For Lynch, the government’s “superior knowledge” about the implications of burden allocation “reinforces [the] conclusion that the political branches should decide such questions in the first instance. [read post]
23 Dec 2008, 2:57 pm
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, December 17, 2008 US v. [read post]
30 Jan 2014, 9:01 pm
As the Court put the point in 1989 in Rodriguez de Quijas v. [read post]
31 Jul 2011, 10:36 pm
(Docket Report) District Court Minnesota: Res judicata bars patent claims that could have been asserted in earlier trademark case involving the ‘Same technology and the same accused products’: Superior Industries, LLC v. [read post]
5 Aug 2014, 6:43 am
Reversing the contrary decision of an appellate court, the New Jersey Supreme Court concluded that there was not a sufficient showing that the employee’s death resulted from a “work effort or strain” within the meaning of the more stringent statutory requirements for establishing a compensable claim for cardiovascular injury disease or death (Renner v AT&T, July 30, 2014, Rodriguez, P). [read post]
2 May 2012, 7:49 am
United States and Hill v. [read post]
10 Jun 2008, 2:36 pm
Supreme Court, June 02, 2008 US v. [read post]
7 Jan 2011, 9:53 am
The panel I moderated that day in April 2008 had panelists: Barbara Rodriguez Mundell, Presiding Judge, Superior Court for Maricopa County Maurice Portley, Judge, Arizona Court of Appeals Pendleton Gaines, Judge, Superior Court for Maricopa County Dan McAuliffe, State Bar President Ed Novak, State Bar President-Elect That’s a great group of folks to sit around and talk about anything. [read post]
7 Jun 2011, 2:17 pm
The Court held that the superior court does not have discretion in sentencing when a firearm restriction is statutorily mandated and the legislature included no discretion to waive or limit the firearm restriction, and ordered the provision stricken from the judgment and sentence. [read post]
16 Nov 2009, 4:51 am
Becton Dickinson (EDTexweblog.com) District Court E D New York: Federal police power trumps patent law: IRIS Corporation v Japan Airlines (IP Frontline) Delaware Court: Honeywell patents on LCDs nixed: court dismisses claim of patent infringement: Honeywell v Fujifilm and Samsung (Managing IP) District Court W D of Wisconsin denies motion claim for claim construction in full: Semiconductor Energy Lab Co v Samsung Elecs. [read post]
16 Nov 2009, 4:51 am
Becton Dickinson (EDTexweblog.com) District Court E D New York: Federal police power trumps patent law: IRIS Corporation v Japan Airlines (IP Frontline) Delaware Court: Honeywell patents on LCDs nixed: court dismisses claim of patent infringement: Honeywell v Fujifilm and Samsung (Managing IP) District Court W D of Wisconsin denies motion claim for claim construction in full: Semiconductor Energy Lab Co v Samsung Elecs. [read post]
16 Nov 2009, 4:51 am
Becton Dickinson (EDTexweblog.com) District Court E D New York: Federal police power trumps patent law: IRIS Corporation v Japan Airlines (IP Frontline) Delaware Court: Honeywell patents on LCDs nixed: court dismisses claim of patent infringement: Honeywell v Fujifilm and Samsung (Managing IP) District Court W D of Wisconsin denies motion claim for claim construction in full: Semiconductor Energy Lab Co v Samsung Elecs. [read post]
9 May 2010, 9:14 pm
” [via Lexisone] Manuel Antonio Rodriguez v. [read post]
27 Aug 2018, 2:58 pm
See also Rodriguez v. [read post]
8 Feb 2016, 12:59 pm
Rodriguez sustained injuries to his head, spine, neck, and left elbow. [read post]
15 Sep 2008, 8:29 pm
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, September 10, 2008 US v. [read post]
25 Jul 2012, 7:56 pm
Rodriguez, Richard places an enormous amount of weight on the Supreme Court’s 1987 decision in United States v. [read post]
2 Nov 2018, 12:39 pm
In last year’s Pena-Rodriguez v. [read post]
22 Dec 2010, 11:36 am
The Cassidys and their son Daniel subsequently cross-complained against Blix Street for royalties allegedly owing.2 The trial of the case commenced in March of 2006, presided over by Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Lee Edmon. [read post]
