Search for: "Premise Distribution Services, Inc."
Results 61 - 80
of 290
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Sep 2018, 6:50 am
Consequently, their conduct was not protected under the NLRA, and their employer did not violate the Act by discharging them (Preferred Building Services, Inc., August 28, 2018). [read post]
29 Jan 2015, 1:31 pm
The state premises its requirement that only licensed lawyers provide certain legal services on consumer protection. [read post]
26 Nov 2013, 8:36 pm
Ambassador Services, Inc. [read post]
2 Dec 2023, 1:45 pm
§1114(1)(a) prohibits the unauthorized “use in commerce of any reproduction . . . of a registered mark in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, or advertising of any goods or services” when “such use is likely to cause confusion. [read post]
15 Sep 2017, 7:58 pm
In the Matter of the Appeal of William-Sonoma, Inc., and Subsidiaries (June, 26, 2012). [read post]
10 Aug 2014, 10:02 pm
Maspeth in Maspeth, NY, noting that inspectors visiting the premises in April and May of this year had found “serious violations” of seafood HAACP regulations. [read post]
7 May 2024, 5:26 am
Accident/Injury occurred off premises . . . [read post]
21 May 2010, 8:36 am
By Eric Goldman Barclays Capital Inc. v. [read post]
23 Jun 2010, 3:35 pm
Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S. [read post]
18 May 2014, 11:03 am
Where the trustee in Doherty had discretion to terminate the trust and “distribute the entire principal of such Trust fund to the beneficiaries thereof,” the premise of the decision to deem the entire trust as countable was based on a finding that “beneficiaries thereof” included the MassHealth applicant and therefore allowed the applicant to “have her cake and eat it too. [read post]
18 May 2014, 11:03 am
Where the trustee in Doherty had discretion to terminate the trust and “distribute the entire principal of such Trust fund to the beneficiaries thereof,” the premise of the decision to deem the entire trust as countable was based on a finding that “beneficiaries thereof” included the MassHealth applicant and therefore allowed the applicant to “have her cake and eat it too. [read post]
19 Aug 2008, 8:28 pm
Spoons, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Jun 2014, 8:04 am
Inc. [read post]
26 Mar 2020, 4:23 pm
Jews for Jesus, Inc., 482 U.S. 569 (1987), where the Court struck down an LAX airport policy that prohibited (literally) all "First Amendment activities" on [read post]
25 May 2017, 8:55 am
The Commission believes that eliminating a standard of conduct will provide greater clarity to stakeholders, because the current Internet conduct standard “is premised on theoretical problems that will be adjudicated on an individual, case-by-case basis, Internet service providers must guess at what they are permitted and not permitted to do. [read post]
25 May 2017, 8:55 am
The Commission believes that eliminating a standard of conduct will provide greater clarity to stakeholders, because the current Internet conduct standard “is premised on theoretical problems that will be adjudicated on an individual, case-by-case basis, Internet service providers must guess at what they are permitted and not permitted to do. [read post]
18 Apr 2010, 2:28 pm
My “Ridiculous Trademark Opposition of the Week” series is revived this week after a long hiatus thanks to a company located in San Diego called Carefusion 2200, Inc. [read post]
17 Jan 2019, 12:49 pm
Reflex Media, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Mar 2013, 3:18 pm
TracFone Wireless, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Aug 2021, 2:38 pm
Interstate Protective Services, Inc. [read post]
