Search for: "AT&T Corp. v Service W., Inc."
Results 1 - 20
of 516
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 May 2024, 7:36 am
W., Inc., 786 F.3d 754, 760 (9th Cir. 2015) (emphasis added). [read post]
11 Apr 2024, 5:59 pm
As articulated in a non-patent case, RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm
You don’t get your own rules. [read post]
18 Mar 2024, 6:00 am
This factor weighs in favor of the worker being an independent contractor when the work relationship is definite in duration, non-exclusive, project-based, or sporadic based on the worker being in business for themself and marketing their services or labor to multiple entities. [read post]
30 Jan 2024, 9:02 pm
I dissent from the Commission’s denial of a petition to amend Rule 202.5(e), our so-called gag rule.[1] This de facto rule follows from the Commission’s enforcement of its policy, adopted in 1972, that it will not “permit a defendant or respondent to consent to a judgment or order that imposes a sanction while denying the allegations in the complaint or order for proceedings. [read post]
13 Dec 2023, 8:49 am
ProCD, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Nov 2023, 10:41 am
” Downtown Disposal Services, Inc. v. [read post]
11 Oct 2023, 9:25 am
The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals has explained the relationship between the two subsections as follows: The more that a claimed cost satisfies the business necessity requirement in subsection (c), the more the contractor’s burden to satisfy the benefit requirement in subsection (b) is reduced. [read post]
25 Aug 2023, 11:31 am
While it is a close case, the Court concludes that under the pleading standards set forth in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. [read post]
17 Jul 2023, 8:32 am
Abitron garnered far less attention than did other intellectual property (IP) cases argued this term, including Jack Daniels Products, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Jun 2023, 10:54 am
Introduction Decisions not to buy or sell goods or services are generally not protected by the First Amendment. [read post]
13 Jun 2023, 5:50 am
From Pinnacle Bancorp, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Jun 2023, 11:23 am
Case Co. v. [read post]
29 Apr 2023, 5:00 am
On July 15, 2013, the Town advised the complainant that, because she had been on a leave of absence for an occupational injury for in excess of one year, her employment was terminated pursuant to the Civil Service Law, but that she could be reinstated if she were found fit to return to work after a medical examination. [read post]
29 Apr 2023, 5:00 am
On July 15, 2013, the Town advised the complainant that, because she had been on a leave of absence for an occupational injury for in excess of one year, her employment was terminated pursuant to the Civil Service Law, but that she could be reinstated if she were found fit to return to work after a medical examination. [read post]
7 Apr 2023, 9:55 am
Bertini v. [read post]
27 Mar 2023, 9:01 pm
For the second year in a row, the “Electronic Technology and Technology Services” and “Health Technology and Services” sectors represented over half of all filings (54%). [read post]
25 Feb 2023, 6:50 pm
The critics and cheerleaders of Dr. [read post]
23 Jan 2023, 4:34 pm
Kitaj Estate; Farley Gwazda, Gwazda Art Services; and contemporary art curator, writer and researcher Kristina Newhouse. [read post]
