Search for: "United States v. United Aircraft Corporation"
Results 1 - 20
of 115
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 May 2011, 1:00 pm
ARTICLE V The requested Party shall not be bound to extradite its own nationals, but it shall have the power to extradite them in its discretion. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 9:00 am
ARTICLE V Extradition shall not be granted in any of the following circumstances: 1. [read post]
10 May 2011, 9:00 am
The words “territorial jurisdiction” as used in this Article and in Article I of the present Convention mean: territory, including territorial waters, and the airspace thereover belonging to or under the control of one of the Contracting Parties, and vessels and aircraft belonging to one of the Contracting Parties or to a citizen or corporation thereof when such vessel is on the high seas or such aircraft is over the high seas. [read post]
8 Apr 2011, 1:00 pm
ARTICLE V Extradition shall not be granted in any of the following circumstances: 1. [read post]
25 May 2011, 1:00 pm
Ratification advised by the Senate of the United States of America on May 27, 1970. [read post]
16 Jul 2013, 1:25 pm
(d) Shares or stock in a corporation shall be deemed to be situated at the place under the laws of which such corporation was created or organized. [read post]
22 Apr 2007, 7:03 pm
See, Zoltek Corp. v. [read post]
18 Sep 2024, 5:39 am
Though aircraft fuel-injector servo manufacturer Precision Airmotive, LLC, proved that defendants Avco Corporation and AVStar Fuel Systems, Inc., willfully infringed Precision’s federally registered trademark, it was not entitled to recover lost profits, the more than $10 million in disgorgement damages it sought, or exemplary damages of any kind (including attorney fees). [read post]
14 Oct 2024, 4:29 am
Though aircraft fuel-injector servo manufacturer Precision Airmotive, LLC, proved that defendants Avco Corporation and AVStar Fuel Systems, Inc., willfully infringed Precision’s federally registered trademark, it was not entitled to recover lost profits, the more than $10 million in disgorgement damages it sought, or exemplary damages of any kind (including attorney fees). [read post]
7 Jun 2007, 11:24 am
Supreme Court will vote today whether to accept for review Zoltek Corporation v. [read post]
10 Mar 2015, 2:05 pm
In Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation v. [read post]
15 Sep 2020, 3:07 pm
Ranza, 793 F.3d at 1076 (quoting Piper Aircraft Co. v. [read post]
14 Sep 2009, 12:41 pm
Titan Corporation and Ibrahim v. [read post]
17 Jan 2007, 2:31 pm
All counts of indictment depended on proof of defendants' efforts to conceal from United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) their personal use of corporate aircraft. [read post]
26 Oct 2009, 4:21 am
See Lu v. [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 6:41 pm
Lockheed Martin makes aircraft, and it has numerous contracts with the United States Government. [read post]
1 May 2012, 4:15 pm
The end of Fosler continues apace, with a published en banc opinion from the NMCCA yesterday, in United States v. [read post]
29 Jan 2024, 4:46 am
(“Simry”) was a family-owned real estate corporation with direct ownership and legal title to seven multi-unit residential real properties in Manhattan. [read post]
16 Jan 2013, 7:45 am
On January 10, 2013, the Supreme Court of Florida issued a 34 page opinion in Diamond Aircraft Industries, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Jul 2009, 9:30 pm
United States Steel Corp., 15 N.J. 301, 311 (1954). [read post]
