Search for: "United States v. Hathaway" Results 41 - 60 of 64
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Jul 2012, 8:37 am by Oona Hathaway
The First Congress of the United States enacted the ATS to ensure that U.S. courts could enforce international law.  [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 10:08 am by Kali Borkoski
On Monday, SCOTUSblog will kick off an online symposium on Kiobel v. [read post]
22 Apr 2012, 9:08 pm by Francis Pileggi
The professor’s argument is based in part on the recent United States Supreme Court decision in Nicastro. [read post]
22 Feb 2012, 1:30 pm by Benjamin Wittes
The answer was easy: “The United States must lead by the power of our example and not by the example of our power.” [read post]
9 Dec 2011, 10:15 am by WSLL
Kunz, Hathaway & Kunz, P.C., Cheyenne, Wyoming.  [read post]
2 May 2011, 4:00 am by Eric Appleby
He served as Canadian Ambassador to the United States in 2005 and 2006. 13. [read post]
31 Mar 2011, 2:38 pm by Steve Bainbridge
Levinson, decided by the United States Supreme Court in 1988, addresses this very question: whether information about a possible acquisition is material. [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 9:47 pm by David Lat
Recall his famous ruling in the movie-industry case of United States v. [read post]
15 Sep 2010, 10:25 am
Yogubliz filed the action in the United States District Court for the Central District of California seeking a declaratory judgment that its BLIZZBERRY and BLIZZ FROZEN YOGURT marks did not infringe DQ’s BLIZZARD marks. [read post]
18 Feb 2010, 11:14 am by Erin Miller
At Slate, Rebecca Crootof and Oona Hathaway caution that a dismissal of Kiyemba v. [read post]
6 Jul 2009, 10:43 pm
Arch and a unit of Berkshire Hathaway Inc. settled a suit last year stemming from allegations that Arch stole trade secrets. [read post]
14 May 2009, 1:56 pm
§ 1957 is applicable if a person "…knowingly engages or attempts to engage in a monetary transaction in criminally derived property of a value greater than $10,000 and is derived from specified unlawful activity…"75 In United States v. [read post]
12 May 2009, 1:42 am
§ 1957 is applicable if a person "…knowingly engages or attempts to engage in a monetary transaction in criminally derived property of a value greater than $10,000 and is derived from specified unlawful activity…"75 In United States v. [read post]
26 Mar 2008, 11:54 pm
College London"Feminism v. [read post]