⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

Cases

Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.

5 opinions for “United States v. Gray Android cellular telephone”

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2016-06-14 · Published · cited 83× · 423 U.S. App. D.C. 183; 825 F.3d 674; 64 Communications Reg. (P&F) 1663; 2016 WL 3251234; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 10716
Opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part filed by Senior Circuit Judge WILLIAMS. TATEL and SRINIVASAN, Circuit Judges: For the third time in seven years, we confront an effort by the Federal Communications Commission to compel internet openness — commonly known as net neutrality — the principle that broadband providers must treat all internet traffi
California Court of Appeal · 2023-07-03 · Published · cited 0×
Filed 7/3/23 CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION* IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO AHMAD RAHEEM PRICE, Petitioner, E078954 v. (Super.Ct.No. RIF2004183) THE SUPERIOR COURT OF OPINION RIVERSIDE COUNTY,
Court of Chancery of Delaware · 2017-08-08 · Published · cited 0×
IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE ACP MASTER, LTD., et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 8508-VCL ) SPRINT CORPORATION, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________ )
Court of Chancery of Delaware · 2017-07-21 · Published · cited 0×
EFiled: Jul 21 2017 08:00AM EDT Transaction ID 60878927 Case No. 9042-VCL IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE ACP MASTER, LTD., et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v.
District Court, N.D. California · 2014-05-14 · Published · cited 28× · 87 F. Supp. 3d 1018; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67225; 2014 WL 1973378
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS Re: ECF Nos. 393, 394, 395, 396 JON S. TIGAR, United States District Judge THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO ALL CASES I. Background... 1029 A. The App Store... 1031 B. The Subject Apps... 1032 C. Apple’s Representations... 1034