Search for: "Taylor v. U.s.*" Results 101 - 120 of 428
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Jul 2016, 7:12 am by Docket Navigator
[W]hile Patent Owner’s argument that the United States 'directed and controlled the allegedly infringing activity' is not without relevance, it does not bear directly on the categories identified by the Supreme Court in [Taylor v. [read post]
3 Jun 2011, 2:51 pm by Viking
Taylor , 53 M.J. 195, 199 (C.A.A.F. 2000). [read post]
7 Jan 2013, 2:31 pm by Karina Fuentes
  Since the language of the applicable state statutes was broad and not equivalent to a federal predicate offense, Supreme Court precedent -Taylor v. [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 2:31 pm by Bexis
Warner–Lambert & Co., 467 F.3d 85 (2d Cir. 2007), presumed to know more about Michigan law than either the Michigan courts (Taylor v. [read post]
23 Mar 2015, 4:29 pm by Jon Sands
The Ninth Circuit vacated a sentence and remanded for resentencing, holding that a federal sentencing court, following Taylor v. [read post]
28 Dec 2016, 11:54 am
  The Circuit held that the categorical approach, which directs a court to look only at the elements of the particular offense of conviction to determine whether it qualifies as a crime of violence (See Taylor v. [read post]