Search for: "United States v. Lowe's Inc"
Results 161 - 180
of 1,142
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Oct 2017, 7:01 am
H Unit Five, Inc., 2017 WL 4271433 (D. [read post]
18 Mar 2011, 10:04 am
United States, 597 F. [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 7:07 am
Servs., Inc. v. [read post]
17 Apr 2007, 11:30 am
(citing Caliber Bodyworks, Inc. v. [read post]
11 Mar 2010, 9:42 am
--Court: United States District Court for the Southern District of New YorkOpinion Date: 3/1/10Cite: PrecisionIR, Inc. v. [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 7:36 am
(Evergreen) appealed from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts dismissing its Second Amended Complaint (complaint). [read post]
8 Jul 2014, 10:15 am
Civil Action No. 13-1887 (ES), United States District Court, D. [read post]
8 Jul 2014, 10:15 am
Civil Action No. 13-1887 (ES), United States District Court, D. [read post]
18 Feb 2011, 6:50 am
At first glance, Global Tech Appliances, Inc. v. [read post]
2 Feb 2022, 8:43 am
In McDonnell Douglas, the United States Supreme Court created a test for courts to use when analyzing discrimination claims brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. [read post]
27 Jan 2023, 4:06 am
Petitioner has not pleaded a presence in the United States. [read post]
28 Sep 2013, 11:08 am
First, the district saw through the argument that the claimed benzene-APL LNT model was good science because the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) relies upon it. [read post]
4 Mar 2016, 12:25 pm
Lee, Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office, No. 15-326 I/P Engine, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Feb 2014, 7:30 am
Practice Tip: The United States Supreme Court addressed the elements required for trade dress to be protected in Two Pesos, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Feb 2024, 2:26 pm
On a motion by President Shrum, the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma dismissed the suit for lack of standing, ruling that the United States Supreme Court in Summers v. [read post]
9 Nov 2009, 3:00 pm
These projects were subject to the Security Act, which provides that only “United States persons” and “qualified United States joint venture persons” were eligible to compete. [read post]
13 Mar 2012, 8:00 am
In T-Peg, Inc., et al. v. [read post]
6 Dec 2010, 12:41 pm
Co., 308 AD2d 475, 476-477; Michaels v United States Tennis Assn., 295 AD2d 222; Jamaica Sav. [read post]
4 Feb 2012, 6:29 am
Late last month, however, a First Circuit panel of the United States Court of Appeals held that Rule 702 required perscrutation of expert witness opinion, and then proceeded to perscrutate perspicaciously, in Samaan v. [read post]
2 May 2012, 7:13 am
” At this blog, Alan Horowitz analyzes last week’s opinion in United States v. [read post]
