Back to Network
4
Shared Docs
3
Same-Page
4 / 4
Mentions
Document Mentions (4 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
arpenter v. United States would have come out differently, since the defendant's historical cell-site location information was in the possession of MetroPCS and Sprint. 138 S. Ct. 2206, 2212 (2018). But the United States Supreme Court rejected application of the third-party doctrine for two reasons, as t
1988) 12 United States v. Stein, 541 F.3d 130 (2d Cir. 2008) 10 United States v. Stokes, 733 F.3d 438 (2d Cir. 2013) 5, 6, 7 United States v. Taylor, 745 F.3d 15 (2d Cir. 2014) 12 US Bank Nat. Ass 'n v. PHL Variable Ins. Co., No. 12 CIV. 6811 CM JCF, 2012 WL 5395249 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 5, 2012) 2
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
arpenter v. United States would have come out differently, since the defendant's historical cell-site location information was in the possession of MetroPCS and Sprint. 138 S. Ct. 2206, 2212 (2018). But the United States Supreme Court rejected application of the third-party doctrine for two reasons, as t
1988) 12 United States v. Stein, 541 F.3d 130 (2d Cir. 2008) 10 United States v. Stokes, 733 F.3d 438 (2d Cir. 2013) 5, 6, 7 United States v. Taylor, 745 F.3d 15 (2d Cir. 2014) 12 US Bank Nat. Ass 'n v. PHL Variable Ins. Co., No. 12 CIV. 6811 CM JCF, 2012 WL 5395249 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 5, 2012) 2
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
arpenter v. United States would have come out differently, since the defendant's historical cell-site location information was in the possession of MetroPCS and Sprint. 138 S. Ct. 2206, 2212 (2018). But the United States Supreme Court rejected application of the third-party doctrine for two reasons, as t
1988) 12 United States v. Stein, 541 F.3d 130 (2d Cir. 2008) 10 United States v. Stokes, 733 F.3d 438 (2d Cir. 2013) 5, 6, 7 United States v. Taylor, 745 F.3d 15 (2d Cir. 2014) 12 US Bank Nat. Ass 'n v. PHL Variable Ins. Co., No. 12 CIV. 6811 CM JCF, 2012 WL 5395249 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 5, 2012) 2
Sponsored
2 mentions
Page EFTA00018999
1988) 12 United States v. Stein, 541 F.3d 130 (2d Cir. 2008) 10 United States v. Stokes, 733 F.3d 438 (2d Cir. 2013) 5, 6, 7 United States v. Taylor, 745 F.3d 15 (2d Cir. 2014) 12 US Bank Nat. Ass 'n v. PHL Variable Ins. Co., No. 12 CIV. 6811 CM JCF, 2012 WL 5395249 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 5, 2012) 2
Page: EFTA00018999 →Page EFTA00019003
arpenter v. United States would have come out differently, since the defendant's historical cell-site location information was in the possession of MetroPCS and Sprint. 138 S. Ct. 2206, 2212 (2018). But the United States Supreme Court rejected application of the third-party doctrine for two reasons, as t
Page: EFTA00019003 →Sponsored
Mutual Connections (103)
Entities connected to both MetroPCS and Emmy Taylor
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON13 w/ MetroPCS·1,366 w/ Emmy
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON6 w/ MetroPCS·512 w/ Emmy
Prince Andrew
PERSON3 w/ MetroPCS·380 w/ Emmy
George W. Bush
PERSON2 w/ MetroPCS·315 w/ Emmy
United States
LOCATION6 w/ MetroPCS·296 w/ Emmy
Julie K. Brown
PERSON3 w/ MetroPCS·298 w/ Emmy
LB
Leon Black
PERSON3 w/ MetroPCS·297 w/ Emmy
Virginia Giuffre
PERSON9 w/ MetroPCS·245 w/ Emmy
Stephen Hawking
PERSON5 w/ MetroPCS·220 w/ Emmy
Michael Cohen
PERSON3 w/ MetroPCS·177 w/ Emmy
John F. Kennedy
PERSON3 w/ MetroPCS·168 w/ Emmy
FBI
ORGANIZATION5 w/ MetroPCS·160 w/ Emmy
MF
Maria Farmer
PERSON2 w/ MetroPCS·154 w/ Emmy
Atlanta
LOCATION12 w/ MetroPCS·133 w/ Emmy
the Southern District
LOCATION3 w/ MetroPCS·139 w/ Emmy
Lawrence Krauss
PERSON7 w/ MetroPCS·131 w/ Emmy
Poland
LOCATION6 w/ MetroPCS·112 w/ Emmy
Oregon
LOCATION6 w/ MetroPCS·110 w/ Emmy
DI
Darren Indyke
PERSON4 w/ MetroPCS·108 w/ Emmy
Detroit
LOCATION7 w/ MetroPCS·95 w/ Emmy