Search for: "SLC Operations Holdings, LLC" Results 1 - 10 of 10
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Sep 2017, 10:55 am by Elizabeth C. Quirk, Muhammad U. Faridi
 The lower court disagreed, “holding that a New York LLC, like a New York corporation, may appoint an SLC to address derivative claims brought on the LLC’s behalf. [read post]
20 Jan 2021, 2:38 pm by Overhauser Law Offices, LLC
Plaintiffs claim Defendants, B&B Operations, LLC, B&K Property Holdings LLC, and B&B Property Holdings, LLC, collectively doing business as Club 44 have used the Plaintiffs’ images to promote their strip club business. [read post]
28 Aug 2017, 3:39 am by Peter Mahler
While stating that it “recognize[s] that the appointment of an SLC may serve an important purpose in the LLC context and endorse[s] the practice generally,” the court refused to extend the practice to LLCs absent authorization in the LLC’s operating agreement. [read post]
28 Aug 2017, 3:39 am by Peter Mahler
While stating that it “recognize[s] that the appointment of an SLC may serve an important purpose in the LLC context and endorse[s] the practice generally,” the court refused to extend the practice to LLCs absent authorization in the LLC’s operating agreement. [read post]
28 Sep 2015, 2:25 pm by Arthur F. Coon
California State Lands Commission, et al (San Francisco Waterfront Partners II, LLC, et al) (1st Dist., Div. 4, 2015) ___ Cal.App.4th ___, 2015 WL 5450294. [read post]
Hudson Opportunity Fund I, LLC,[5] the First Department endorsed the practice of the appointment of a Special Litigation Committee (SLC) by a limited liability company (LLC) “at least where explicitly contemplated” by the LLC’s operating agreement. [read post]
25 Oct 2010, 10:22 am by Stefanie Levine
Patent No. 5,956,681 owned by Intellectual Ventures Holding 56 LLC and entitled APPARATUS FOR GENERATING TEXT DATA ON THE BASIS OF SPEECH DATA INPUT FROM TERMINAL. [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 9:18 pm by Francis G.X. Pileggi
  In this case, the Court reasoned that because the Delaware action was not the first filed action, the McWane doctrine applied and under that doctrine it is not necessary that the competing cases be exactly the same, but rather, it is sufficient that they be “functionally identical” to the Delaware action and that they were filed in a jurisdictionally competent Court arising out of a “common nucleus of operative facts. [read post]
30 Jan 2009, 7:00 pm
You can separately subscribe to the IP Think Tank Global Week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com]   Highlights this week included: WTO panel releases decision in US complaint against China over its IP laws (Michael Geist) (Excess Copyright) (IPKat) (ContentAgenda) (Intellectual Property Watch) (Michael Geist) (Law360) (Techdirt) (Patent Docs) WIPO press release: ‘Global economic slowdown impacts 2008 international patent filings’ (WIPO) (IPKat) (Law360)… [read post]