Search for: "United States v. One Case of Clocks"
Results 281 - 300
of 583
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jun 2015, 7:32 am
We’ll skip the ritual incantations about how an opinion surely must be circulating in at least one of these cases. [read post]
29 May 2015, 2:24 pm
United States, 14-8358, won a grant after just one relist. [read post]
13 May 2015, 5:22 am
Sember was “indicted for stealing certain United States Air Force sensitive and proprietary technical, engineering and computer data and codes having a value in excess of $1,000 in violation of 18 U.S. [read post]
13 May 2015, 5:12 am
” United States v. [read post]
20 Apr 2015, 1:29 pm
The United States also filed an amicus brief supporting the challengers. [read post]
6 Apr 2015, 2:37 pm
The cases were removed to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on diversity grounds. [read post]
18 Mar 2015, 9:26 am
Though the IRS does not charge a fee for this service, the card processors do.Taxpayers who choose to pay by check or money order should make the payment out to the “United States Treasury. [read post]
17 Mar 2015, 12:45 pm
United States v. [read post]
17 Mar 2015, 7:45 am
United States v. [read post]
7 Mar 2015, 1:36 pm
The facts underlying the case represent a variation on the theme of fraudulent concealment in that pertinent documents themselves could be discovered, but the error in them would not be readily apparent, and would therefore not give rise to awareness of injury and ticking of the limitations clock. [read post]
27 Feb 2015, 5:44 am
United States, 679 F.2d 1350, 1352 (11th Cir.1982) (“Recognizing that there are often great inequalities in bargaining power between employers and employees, Congress made the FLSA’s provisions mandatory. [read post]
27 Feb 2015, 5:44 am
United States, 679 F.2d 1350, 1352 (11th Cir.1982) (“Recognizing that there are often great inequalities in bargaining power between employers and employees, Congress made the FLSA’s provisions mandatory. [read post]
4 Feb 2015, 12:16 pm
Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) with power to conduct post-grant proceedings in which accused infringers can challenge a patent’s validity in a trial-like procedure at the Patent and Trademark Office.1 Considered a quicker and more economical route, post-grant proceedings have dramatically altered the United States patent litigation landscape in the last two years. [read post]
23 Jan 2015, 8:37 pm
The latter point has attracted a great deal of commentary to date, but some of that commentary has overlooked important details, so please don’t forget to read Section V at the end. [read post]
21 Jan 2015, 1:17 pm
Such was the case on Wednesday in Gelboim v. [read post]
20 Jan 2015, 2:03 pm
On Wednesday morning, after opinions are released at ten o’clock, the Supreme Court will hold one hour of oral argument on the issue of how difficult it will be to prove discrimination in home sales or rentals, in the case of Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. [read post]
13 Jan 2015, 9:00 am
Kohn will be one of the attorneys arguing the case on behalf of the whistleblowers. [read post]
17 Dec 2014, 4:30 am
That doctrine comes into play when: (1) the federal plaintiff lost in state court; (2) the plaintiff complains of some injury from the state court judgment; (3) the state court judgment antedated the filing of the federal case; and (4) the plaintiff is inviting the federal court to reject the state court judgment. The plaintiffs appealed that decision to the Third Circuit, and that’s where we are today: Johnson v. [read post]
10 Dec 2014, 7:41 am
In Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Dec 2014, 11:12 am
United States, about threats on Facebook – the Justices themselves took with enthusiasm to the first case. [read post]
