Search for: "Starbucks Corporation"
Results 181 - 200
of 685
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Nov 2018, 6:19 am
A few years ago, hedge fund Pershing Square—which popped up on Oct. 9 with a 1.1 percent stake in coffee company Starbucks—went after retailer J.C. [read post]
29 Oct 2018, 1:04 pm
In 2012, a British parliamentary committee chided executives from Amazon, Google, and even Starbucks for employing such tactics. [read post]
19 Oct 2018, 5:52 am
We aren’t quite to Halloween, but the candy is certainly crowding the shelves of local stores, whose owners might want to take a look at Ryan v. [read post]
1 Oct 2018, 8:10 am
Amplify Federal Credit Union , Opposition No. 91228233 [Section 2(d) priority contest involving two applicants seeking to register the mark AMPLIFY, in standard character form, for charitable fundraising services].October 30, 2018 - 10 AM: In re Starbucks Corporation, Serial No. 85792872 [Refusal to register an alleged mark consisting of a green circle placed centrally on the front exterior side of a white cup, for "Coffee, tea, coffee and tea based beverages, and cocoa;… [read post]
23 Sep 2018, 4:03 pm
Probably less generally known is that Cranor was one of the founders of an organization, the Council for Education and Research on Toxics (CERT), which recently was the complaining party in a California case in which CERT sought money damages for Starbucks’ failure to label each cup of coffee sold as known to the State of California as causing cancer.6 Having a so-called not-for-profit corporation can also be pretty handy, especially when it holds itself out as a scientific… [read post]
22 Aug 2018, 8:53 am
Starbucks Corporation, ostensibly clarifying the application of the widely adopted de minimis doctrine to California’s wage-hour laws. [read post]
12 Aug 2018, 7:12 pm
“People” refers to any and all of us — consumers, small business people, executive directors, corporate executives and in-house counsel. [read post]
11 Aug 2018, 6:34 am
Starbucks Corp., July 26, 2018, Supreme Court of California More Blog Entries: L’Oreal Accused of Wage and Hour Violations, April 5, 2018, L.A. [read post]
9 Aug 2018, 2:37 pm
In case you missed the in-depth coverage of Employment Law Daily for July, here’s a recap of some key developments in the L&E community. [read post]
7 Aug 2018, 7:05 am
Human first, then Technology Dan Wright, who leads Osborne Clarke Solutions and is a former corporate lawyer, agreed with all of the above, and had a few other essential points that he distilled into a bulleted list. [read post]
5 Aug 2018, 3:08 pm
Park & Associates, PLC RPX Corporation SBMC Guntin & Gust [read post]
31 Jul 2018, 9:54 am
Starbucks Corporation, the California Supreme Court held that California wage and hour laws have not adopted the FLSA’s de minimis doctrine. [read post]
30 Jul 2018, 3:32 pm
Starbucks Corporation, in which it considered the applicability of the de minimis doctrine to claims for unpaid wages under the California Labor Code. [read post]
30 Jul 2018, 3:32 pm
Starbucks Corporation, in which it considered the applicability of the de minimis doctrine to claims for unpaid wages under the California Labor Code. [read post]
30 Jul 2018, 12:48 pm
Starbucks Corporation (S234969) on whether California wage and hour law recognizes the de minimis doctrine established by the United States Supreme Court in Anderson v. [read post]
30 Jul 2018, 12:09 pm
Starbucks Corporation, ostensibly clarifying the application of the widely adopted de minimis doctrine to California’s wage-hour laws. [read post]
27 Jul 2018, 1:24 pm
In this role, he had the responsibility of completing the “close store procedure” at his store, which required him to transmit the store’s financial information to Starbuck’s corporate headquarters. [read post]
27 Jul 2018, 1:24 pm
In this role, he had the responsibility of completing the “close store procedure” at his store, which required him to transmit the store’s financial information to Starbuck’s corporate headquarters. [read post]
9 Jul 2018, 6:49 am
Many corporations have announced plans to phase out single use plastic straws. [read post]
29 Jun 2018, 3:16 am
., Opposition No. 91200616 and Cancellation No. 92053622 [Consolidated petition for cancellation of a registration for, and opposition to registration of, the mark J5 for various goods in classes 3, 14, 16, 18, 21, and 28, including books in the field of entertainment and musical performances and musical toys on the grounds of nonuse and abandonment, and likelihood of confusion with and likely dilution of the registered mark JACKSON 5 for entertainment services].July 17, 2018 - 10 AM: In re… [read post]
