Sentences with phrase «federal circuit court rules»

(a) in relation to the Federal Circuit Court of Australia — means the related Federal Circuit Court Rules; and

This declaration aligns the sunsetting dates of the Family Law (Bilateral Arrangements — Intercountry Adoption) Regulations 1998, Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001, Family Law (Family Dispute Resolution Practitioners) Regulations 2008, Family Law Regulations 1984, Family Law Rules 2004 and Family Law (Superannuation) Regulations 2001 to 1 April 2023 in order to facilitate a single review of the instruments.

The Federal Circuit court ruled in Oracle's appeal that certain declarative code and the structure, sequence and organization of the Java APIs are entitled to copyright protection and remanded the case back to the district court.

Not exact matches

Separately on Tuesday, a judge for the U.S. Federal Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, ruled narrowly in favor of the subsidies in a case called David King.

Her ruling followed the Ninth Circuit federal appeals court's ruling from Thursday that had already prevented the order from being enforced nationally.

House Democrats introduced a bill to restore the Federal Communications Commission's non-discrimination and no - blocking rules that were struck down by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

In the ruling, which was made public just before Christmas, the U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington said the government was wrong to deny a trademark to «The Slants,» an Asian - American band.

In a recent court case, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Department of Justice is prohibited from using federal funds to prosecute businesses who operate within state laws regarding medical marijcourt case, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Department of Justice is prohibited from using federal funds to prosecute businesses who operate within state laws regarding medical marijCourt of Appeals ruled that the Department of Justice is prohibited from using federal funds to prosecute businesses who operate within state laws regarding medical marijuana.

The federal government decided against appealing the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decision tossing out the Department of Labor fiduciary rule.

On 6 August 2013, Federal Judge Amos Mazzant of the Eastern District of Texas of the Fifth Circuit ruled that bitcoins are «a currency or a form of money» (specifically securities as defined by Federal Securities Laws), and as such were subject to the court's jurisdiction, [274][274] and Germany's Finance Ministry subsumed bitcoins under the term «unit of account» — a financial instrument — though not as e-money or a functional currency, a classification nonetheless having legal and tax implications.

A day before the one - year anniversary of the Supreme Court's decision to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act, which had barred same - sex marriages from federal recognition, a divided three - judge panel of the 10th Circuit Court ruled...

The 2d U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the conviction of Skelos and his son Adam for using Dean's influence to extort financial benefits for Adam had to be overturned because the jury charge didn't comply with a new Supreme Court ruling narrowing federal anti-corruption laws.

Winner cited a 2004 circuit court decision in Ohio (ACLU v. Taft) that ruled the federal need for representation should trump state law in certain circumstances.

The Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said the conviction of Skelos and his son Adam for using the father's influence to extort financial benefits for his son had to be overturned because the jury charge didn't comply with a new Supreme Court ruling that narrowed federal anti-corruption laws.

But last month, the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the convictions, ruling that jury instructions hadn't reflected a later U.S. Supreme Court finding that narrowed federal corruption laws, requiring officials to exercise power instead of just make a phone call or set up a meeting.

The federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today that disgraced former Assemblyman Eric Stevenson's pension contributions are fair game as the feds seek to recoup $ 22,000 in ill - gotten gains.

It's known as Dillon's Rule and is named after John Forrest Dillon, who was appointed a Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Judge by President Ulysses S. Grant in 1869.

Finally, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in February 2004 that the federal government failed to sufficiently demonstrate a cultural linkage between the tribes and the skeleton.

A panel of judges from the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is expected to rule this week on whether a temporary halt placed on the order by a federal district judge should be kept in place.

June 14, 2016 • The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit rejected a lawsuit by telecom, cable and wireless industry associations against new rules that expanded federal oversight of Internet service providers.

In its decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit parted ways with the rulings of two other federal appeals courts in similar cases, involving teachers in Boston and Kalamazoo, Mich. (See Education Week, May 18, 1983.)

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled late last month that due to extensive state control over school finances, California school districts are state agencies and deserve the same 11th Amendment immunity against federal lawsuits enjoyed by other branches of state government.

Although the federal district court in Charlotte ruled in the parents» favor, the school system appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, according to Gricourt in Charlotte ruled in the parents» favor, the school system appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, according to GriCourt of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, according to Griffin.

Lawyers for the state of Ohio last month asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit to overturn a federal district court's ruling that expanded the state's responsibility to fund school desegregation in Lorain County under the terms of a consent deCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit to overturn a federal district court's ruling that expanded the state's responsibility to fund school desegregation in Lorain County under the terms of a consent decourt's ruling that expanded the state's responsibility to fund school desegregation in Lorain County under the terms of a consent decree.

Both a federal district judge and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit had ruled in favor of a student who had challenged the display of Warner Sallman's «Head of Christ» at Bloomingdale...

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit upholds the constitutionality of the «off the top» funding method used to allocate Chapter 1 aid to pupils in church - affiliated schools; it is the first appellate court to rule on the question, on which federal district courts have been divCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit upholds the constitutionality of the «off the top» funding method used to allocate Chapter 1 aid to pupils in church - affiliated schools; it is the first appellate court to rule on the question, on which federal district courts have been divcourt to rule on the question, on which federal district courts have been divided.

The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in David D. v. Dartmouth School Committee also allows state education officials to be challenged in federal court on the basis of state standard andCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit in David D. v. Dartmouth School Committee also allows state education officials to be challenged in federal court on the basis of state standard andcourt on the basis of state standard and law.

A panel of the Ninth Circuit then again reversed the District Court, this time ruling on the federal constitutional question.

These amicus briefs — one filed in the U. S. Supreme Court in two California cases, the other in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit dealing with a Kentucky case — ask the courts to reconsider rulings that misinterpret the main federal special education law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

The action comes despite a 2010 ruling from the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court that invalidated federal regulations allowing the practice after civil rights groups complained that teachers in the alternative programs - or internships - were disproportionately given classroom assignments at schools in low - income neighborhoods and those serving at - risk students.

The case asks the Court to hear and overturn a ruling by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals (Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee) that makes mandatory reporters of suspected child abuse vulnerable to federal claims brought by an alleged abuser.

This summer, the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Apple violated federal antitrust law by conspiring to fix the price of ebooks.

CFPB's structure is constitutional, appeals court rules — The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Congress can insulate the federal consumer protection bureau from political pressure by shielding the director from being fcourt rules — The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Congress can insulate the federal consumer protection bureau from political pressure by shielding the director from being fCourt of Appeals ruled that Congress can insulate the federal consumer protection bureau from political pressure by shielding the director from being fired.

In Shea, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit extended the rule from Johnson and Weber to federal hiring, not just municipal and private employment.

Surfrider received a ruling in our favor from the federal District Court in January 2015, but the issue has been appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Back on July 7, 2017, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected FERC's order revising PJM Interconnection's «Minimum Offer Price Rule» (MOPR), saying FERC exceeded its Section 205 authority under the Federal Power Act by commanding an entirely different approach to the MOPR than what PJM's stakeholders agreed upon...

Pursuant to Clean Air Act § 307 (b)(1), 42 U.S.C. § 7607 (b)(1), Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, and D.C. Circuit Rule 15, Air Alliance Houston, California Communities Against Toxics, Environmental Defense Fund, Environmental Integrity Project, Hoosier Environmental Council, Louisiana Bucket Brigade, Natural Resources Defense Council, Ohio Citizen Action, and Sierra Club (collectively, «Petitioners») hereby petition this Court for review of the 2 final action taken by Respondents U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Administrator Scott Pruitt in the attached memorandum from William L. Wehrum, dated January 25, 2018 (Attachment 1), and in the Federal Register notice published at 83 Fed.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has squarely ruled, Judge Batten said, that where a copyright owner could not sustain an infringement action in federal court, then the would - be defendant in a potential coercive action can not bring an anticipatory declaratory judgement acCourt of Appeals has squarely ruled, Judge Batten said, that where a copyright owner could not sustain an infringement action in federal court, then the would - be defendant in a potential coercive action can not bring an anticipatory declaratory judgement accourt, then the would - be defendant in a potential coercive action can not bring an anticipatory declaratory judgement action.

It will be up to the Federal Circuit to try and find a new rule, somewhere between «machine or transformation» and «useful, concrete, tangible» and this almost certainly means that we'll be back at the Supreme Court arguing similar issues within a few years, asking the court to ratify or reject the next Federal Circuit attempt.&rCourt arguing similar issues within a few years, asking the court to ratify or reject the next Federal Circuit attempt.&rcourt to ratify or reject the next Federal Circuit attempt.»

Marc Mayerson blogs that a recent ruling by the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Federal Ins.

Justice Phelan noted that the United States Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit had «destroyed this 25 % rule» when it had stated «This court now holds as a matter of Federal Circuit law that the 25 percent rule of thumb is a fundamentally flawed tool for determining a baseline royalty rate in a hypothetical negotiation.&rCourt of Appeal for the Federal Circuit had «destroyed this 25 % rule» when it had stated «This court now holds as a matter of Federal Circuit law that the 25 percent rule of thumb is a fundamentally flawed tool for determining a baseline royalty rate in a hypothetical negotiation.&rcourt now holds as a matter of Federal Circuit law that the 25 percent rule of thumb is a fundamentally flawed tool for determining a baseline royalty rate in a hypothetical negotiation.»

The court ruled that the Act's procedural steps could not be enforced through federal injunctions and directed the Federal Circuit to determine the availability of state law injunctions on federal injunctions and directed the Federal Circuit to determine the availability of state law injunctions on Federal Circuit to determine the availability of state law injunctions on remand.

The latest procedural dispute between Apple and Google (Motorola) is over which U.S. appeals court — the Federal Circuit or the Seventh Circuit — should hear the parties» cross-appeal of a FRAND contract ruling handed down in November 2012 by the United States District Court for the Western District of Wiscocourt — the Federal Circuit or the Seventh Circuit — should hear the parties» cross-appeal of a FRAND contract ruling handed down in November 2012 by the United States District Court for the Western District of WiscoCourt for the Western District of Wisconsin.

But the Eighth Circuit said nothing in the CAFA or the federal rules prohibited the parties from agreeing to dismiss and re-file in state court.

The court overturned a Ninth Circuit ruling that the statute governing the company entitles it to bring any case in federal courts and move any case brought against it to federal court.

The U. S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has ruled that the Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home (Little Sisters) demonstrated sufficient interest in federal litigation involving portions of the religious exemption interim final rule (IFR) to warrant

The court notes the similarities to the so - called «25 % Rule» that the Federal Circuit found unreliable in Uniloc.

As reported by Ian Chant in the Library Journal on Tuesday the Washington, D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) «overstepped its bounds as a regulator in putting those rules in place.»

Yesterday, the Law Memo blog posted a link to a 9th Circuit decision, Pollard v. GEO Group, holding — contrary to what other courts of appeals have ruled — that federal prison inmates may recover damages under the Bivens doctrine from employees of private corporations running those prisons pursuant to contracts with the Bureau of Prisons.

In a decision written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit and ruled that patent exhaustion applies both to «Return Program» cartridges in the U.S. and to cartridges sold outside the U.S.