Posts tagged with: "555"
Results 281 - 300
of 1,922
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 May 2007, 9:20 pm
What do these troops in Kosovo and George Steinbrenner have in common? [read post]
10 Nov 2020, 6:35 am
It’s Obamacare day at the Supreme Court. [read post]
10 Dec 2020, 4:00 am
It’s a busy Thursday at the Supreme Court. [read post]
15 Jul 2022, 6:18 pm
Talk about anything you want in the comments.And here's a bee on that coneflower (video by Meade, unintended audio by me): [read post]
9 Aug 2023, 4:49 pm
14 Nov 2016, 12:47 pm
PRESS RELEASE Samantha A. [read post]
25 Apr 2021, 6:28 am
The official sunrise time this morning was 5:59. [read post]
22 Jan 2021, 4:53 am
Here’s a round-up of Supreme Court-related news and commentary from around the web: Biden pivots away from old court battles, helps ignite new ones (Lawrence Hurley, Reuters) Supreme Court Case Could Limit Future Lawsuits Against Fossil Fuel Industry (John Schwartz, The New York Times) The Supreme Court Decision That Saved States Billions (Alan Greenblatt, Governing) Liberal group renews pressure on Biden, Democrats to expand Supreme Court (Alex Roarty, The Charlotte Observer) We rely on our… [read post]
23 Dec 2020, 5:00 am
Here’s a round-up of Supreme Court-related news and commentary from around the web: Justice Breyer on Whether Judges Get More Liberal as They Get Older (Dahlia Lithwick, Slate) What Will It Take to Get a Black Woman on the Supreme Court? [read post]
1 May 2024, 5:16 pm
20 May 2024, 4:00 am
Each Monday we present brief excerpts of recent posts from five of Canada’s award-winning legal blogs chosen at random* from more than 80 recent Clawbie winners. [read post]
26 Jul 2011, 3:10 am
(emphasis added) In view of the language of 555(c), which remains unchanged by the proposal, it is clear that submissions by third parties in patent reexamination that address matters of compliance with Rule 555 cannot be considered in the reexamination proceeding. [read post]
2 Jul 2018, 1:32 pm
In turn, assume that further analysis or production from the provider(s) reveals (301) 555-4321 was used to call (410) 555-5678. [read post]
11 Apr 2016, 1:41 pm
Levine, 555 U.S. 555 (2009).So, is there a statutory sameness requirement for biosimilars that the FDA is conveniently forgetting about? [read post]
20 Nov 2015, 12:44 pm
Under Levine, 555 U.S. 555, 571 (2009), there is “impossibility preemption” – preemption because it is impossible to comply with both state and federal requirements – when there is “clear evidence that the FDA would not have approved” the labeling change the plaintiffs seek. [read post]
18 May 2016, 12:03 pm
Summum, 555 U.S. 460. [read post]
26 Mar 2014, 1:11 pm
Levine, 555 U.S. 555 (2009), “clear evidence” standard. [read post]
2 Oct 2014, 9:18 am
Levine, 555 U.S. 555 (2009), that if Congress wants express preemption it can say so, therefore to heck with implied preemption. [read post]
9 Feb 2023, 2:36 pm
But as the district judge pointed out, 555 F. [read post]
17 Sep 2018, 4:35 am
Winter, 555 U.S. at 20. [read post]
