Search for: "United States v. Pink" Results 1 - 20 of 210
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Aug 2014, 9:47 am
 The Fashionista blog predicts that this is unlikely to be the end of the story, with a further appeal here and/or further proceedings in the United States unless the parties can use yesterday’s judgment to form the basis of a coexistence agreement. [read post]
21 Jan 2013, 7:59 am by Sheldon Toplitt
Map of South Dakota highlighting Union County (Photo credit: Wikipedia)United States District Court for the District of South Dakota Judge Karen Schreier will hear arguments from Beef Products, Inc (BPI) seeking to remand its $1.2 billion defamation suit against ABC News to state court, Reuters wire service reported.The case, Beef Products Inc. et al. v. [read post]
18 Apr 2018, 7:15 am by Ilya Somin
The soon-to-be-released independent film Little Pink House dramatizes the story behind Kelo v. [read post]
2 Aug 2016, 1:43 pm by Dan Flynn
A tentative date of June 2017 has been set for the start of the jury trial in a South Dakota state court over the “pink slime” dispute known as BPI v. [read post]
6 Nov 2019, 7:59 am
The relevant date for calculating novelty as required under Article 10 of the Basic Regulation was July 1992, which was the date when the Cripps Pink apple trees were first marketed in the United Kingdom under the trade name ‘Pink Lady. [read post]
9 Aug 2016, 3:30 am by Bethany Berger
Like the Nazi use of the pink triangle, the US Supreme Court’s 1903 decision in Lone Wolf v. [read post]
5 May 2017, 7:51 am by Sever | Storey
New London, a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) in 2005. [read post]
25 Jan 2018, 4:04 pm by INFORRM
ABC News v Beef Products Inc, “The Pink Slime case” (United States) ABC News and Beef Products Inc. reached a $177m million settlement after the news outlets report in 2012 that the food production company made low-cost processed beef that equated to “pink slime”. [read post]
9 Jun 2015, 7:52 am by Paul Stephan
President Truman’s initial decision not to recognize the sovereignty of any state over Jerusalem seems much more clearly within the nexus of attributes covered by recognition than, say, the claims settlement mechanism memorialized in the Litvinov Assignment that United States v. [read post]