Search for: "United States v. Clemente"
Results 161 - 180
of 456
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jul 2015, 9:07 am
On November 14, 2014, in Priests for Life v. [read post]
22 Jun 2015, 8:16 am
Here is the complaint in Southern Ute Indian Tribe v. [read post]
27 Apr 2015, 1:34 pm
” Arguing for the United States, Assistant to the Solicitor General John Bash advanced a kind of hybrid position. [read post]
12 Mar 2015, 9:01 pm
In Salazar v. [read post]
23 Feb 2015, 9:10 am
Oh, by the way, I suppose it also is relevant that the United States Trustee did not object to either Baker Botts’s original fee or the fee it requested for the cost of defending its application, and that the bankruptcy judge rejected all of ASARCO’s challenges to the underlying fee award. [read post]
23 Feb 2015, 8:18 am
Daoud v. [read post]
18 Dec 2014, 7:08 am
United States, 14-282, is yet another gift from the St. [read post]
19 Nov 2014, 5:37 am
On August 30, 2013, the Texas Supreme Court decided two cases involving the Episcopal Church of the United States. [read post]
18 Nov 2014, 1:28 pm
” Sorrell v. [read post]
4 Nov 2014, 3:49 pm
United States. [read post]
28 Oct 2014, 5:00 am
Participating as an amicus, the United States adds one more argument worth mentioning. [read post]
6 Oct 2014, 6:00 am
Judge Clement first analyzed and concluded that United States Supreme Court jurisprudence does not require punitive damages in unseaworthiness cases. [read post]
30 Aug 2014, 10:44 am
(The Ninth Circuit reached a similar conclusion in the Doe v. [read post]
In an IPR Proceeding With Several Listed Petitioners, The Petitioners Must Speak With A Single Voice
27 Aug 2014, 11:47 am
District Courts and in the United States Patent and Trademark Office, including numerous IPRs currently pending before the PTAB. [read post]
8 Jul 2014, 3:12 pm
Section 1985 of United States Code tile 42 provides a civil remedy to citizens who have been deprived of federally guaranteed rights by conspirators acting under "color of law. [read post]
15 Jun 2014, 1:39 pm
Instead, the initial question on the merits is whether, notwithstanding the absence of any such legal duty, the state nevertheless imposes “substantial pressure on an adherent to modify his behavior and to violate his beliefs," Thomas v. [read post]
8 May 2014, 9:00 am
Clement insists that the balancing test in Mathews v. [read post]
24 Apr 2014, 11:59 am
” So the Justices also pressed Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart, who argued on behalf of the United States, to articulate a rule that would spare cloud computing from liability. [read post]
22 Apr 2014, 1:17 pm
Co. v. [read post]
22 Apr 2014, 1:17 pm
Co. v. [read post]
