Cases

PER CURIAM: *1073BACKGROUND In 1970, Congress enacted Title X of the Public Health Service Act ("Title X") to create a limited grant program for certain types of pre-pregnancy family planning services. See Pub. L. No. 91-572,

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JENNY LISETTE FLORES, No. 19-56326 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v. 2:85-cv-04544- DMG-AGR JEFFREY A. ROSEN, Acting Attorney General; CHAD F. WOLF; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND OPINION SECURITY; U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Yost v. Rover Pipeline, L.L.C., Slip Opinion No. 2022-Ohio-766.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 4

Reversed and Remanded and Memorandum Opinion filed November 4, 2021. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-17-00223-CV REBECCA WILSON, ET AL., Appellants1 V. GEORGE FLEMING AND FLEMING & ASSOCIATES, L.L.P., Appellees On Appeal from the 189th District Court

KEVIN MCNULTY, United States District Judge These are consolidated Hatch-Waxman actions for infringement of United States Patent No. 8,822,438 ("the '438 patent") brought by Janssen Biotech, Inc.; Janssen Oncology, Inc.; Janssen Research & Development, LLC (collectively, "Janssen"); and BTG International Ltd. ("BTG"). Janssen and BTG co-own the '438 patent. The '438 patent contains twenty claims covering methods for the treatm

Reversed and Remanded and Opinion filed December 21, 2018. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-17-00223-CV REBECCA WILSON, ET AL., Appellants1 V. GEORGE FLEMING AND FLEMING & ASSOCIATES, L.L.P., Appellees On Appeal from the 189th District Court Harr

386 B.R. 37 (2008) In re THE BROWN SCHOOLS, et al., Debtors. George L. Miller, Chapter 7 Trustee, Plaintiff, v. McCown De Leeuw & Co., Inc.; Kids Acquisition, LLC; McCown De Leeuw & Co. Ill, L.P.; MDC Management Company, III, L.P.; MDC Management Company, HIA, L.P.; McCown De Leeuw & CO. Ill (Europe), L.P.; McCown De Leeuw & Co. Ill (Asia), L.P.; Gamma Fund LLC, McCown De Leeuw & Co. IV, L.P.; McCown De Leeuw & Co. IV

368 B.R. 394 (2007) In re THE BROWN SCHOOLS, et al., Debtors. George L. Miller, Chapter 7 Trustee, Plaintiff, v. McCown De Leeuw & Co., Inc.; Kids Acquisition, LLC; McCown de Leeuw & Co. III, L.P.; MDC Management Company, III, L.P.; MDC Management Company, IIIA, L.P.; McCown de Leeuw & Co. III (Europe), L.P.; *395 McCown de Leeuw & Co. III (Asia), L.P.; Gamma Fund LLC, McCown de Leeuw &

511 F.Supp.2d 1339 (2007) JEFFREY O. et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF BOCA RATON, Defendant. No. 03-80178-CIV. United States District Court, S.D. Florida. February 26, 2007. *1340 *1341 James Kellogg Green, West Palm Beach, FL, William K. Hill, Melissa Pallett-Vasquez, Bilzin Sumberg Baena Price

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA 2022-NCSC-133 No. 407A21 Filed 16 December 2022 QUAD GRAPHICS, INC. v. N.C. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-27(a)(2) from the order and opinion entered on 23 June 2021 by Judge Gregory P. McGuire, Special Superior Court Judge for Complex Business Cases, in Superior Court, Wake County, grantin

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA 2022-NCSC-133 No. 407A21 Filed 16 December 2022 QUAD GRAPHICS, INC. v. N.C. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-27(a)(2) from the order and opinion entered on 23 June 2021 by Judge Gregory P. McGuire, Special Superior Court Judge for Complex Business Cases, in Superior Court, Wake County, grantin

ORDER ON PENDING MOTIONS SIMKO, United States Magistrate Judge. Pending are Defendants’ Motion for Order Requiring Plaintiff to Show Cause Why He Should Not Be Held In Contempt and Sanctioned for Violating the Protective Order (Doc. 105) and Defendants’ Motion for Order Compelling Production of Documents and Privilege Log (Doc. 116). For the reasons more fully explained below, both motions are GRANTED in par

(1) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (2) DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT [Doc. Nos. 49, 52] MARILYN L. HUFF, District Judge On May 6, 2019, Plaintiff Collette Adkins ("Plaintiff") filed a motion for partial summary judgment, (Doc. No. 49) and Defendants County of San Diego, William

Justice Thomas, with whom Justice Kennedy joins, and with whom Justice Scalia joins except for Part I-B, dissenting. I The Court today allows plaintiffs to obtain certification of securities-fraud class actions without proof that common questions predominate over individualized questions of reliance, in contravention of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3). The Court does so by all but eli

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Hildebrand v. Wingate Transport, Inc., Slip Opinion No. 2014-Ohio-167.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 4

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State v. Froman, Slip Opinion No. 2020-Ohio-4523.] NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical o

[Cite as State v. Lynn, 129 Ohio St.3d 146, 2011-Ohio-2722.] THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLANT, v. LYNN, APPELLEE. [Cite as State v. Lynn, 129 Ohio St.3d 146, 2011-Ohio-2722.] Criminal law — Indictment — Aggravated burglary — Underlying criminal offense — Plain-error analysis — Conforming jury instructions to the evidence presented at trial. (No. 2010-0251 — Submitted January 19, 2011 — Decided June 9, 2011.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals

MANSFIELD, Justice (dissenting). Abortion is one of the most divisive issues in America today. Each side in the debate is motivated by a serious, legitimate concern: on the one hand, a woman's ability to make decisions regarding her own body; on the other, human life. Whatever one may think of the United States Supreme Court's abortion cases, they recognize this point. As Justices O'Connor, Kennedy, and Souter w

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-4458-13T2 JOHN M. GATELY and PATTY SUE GATELY (h/w), APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION Plaintiffs-Appellants, October 22, 2015 v.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-4458-13T2 JOHN M. GATELY and PATTY SUE GATELY (h/w), APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION Plaintiffs-Appellants, October 22, 2015 v.