Search for: "Three S Consulting v. US" Results 2021 - 2040 of 5,357
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Jul 2017, 6:56 am by apricotlaw
Three others in the car were injured, as well as one person in a second car. [read post]
16 Jul 2024, 2:25 pm by Jocelyn Bosse
The text concludes with Chapter 26 on use by the Crown. [read post]
10 Mar 2010, 6:27 am by Ashby Jones
Georgia opinion, but reaffirmed its uses in a 1976 opinion called Gregg v. [read post]
2 Sep 2016, 10:03 am by Christopher Simon
If you’ve recently been injured in an auto accident and are curious about the legal options you may have, feel free to contact us to schedule a free case consultation. [read post]
8 Jan 2012, 7:56 pm
Begging the question, does the next age in software protection belong to copyright (see Apple v Psystar, Oracle v Google)? [read post]
If you are the victim of a defamatory attack on your business or a consumer who has been sued to stop you from posting criticism of a business on line at Yelp or anywhere else, contact one of our Oak Brook and Chicago defamation lawyers for a free consultation at (877) 990-4990 or online by filling out our contact us form. [read post]
2 Apr 2010, 4:38 am by J
The leaseholders accepted that it may be necessary for the authority to produce quite a sizeable document in order to comply with the consultation requirements, but argued that this was not a reason to grant dispensation; that it may be of little practical use to leaseholders is not the issue. [read post]
13 Jun 2008, 3:40 am
, Schering-Plough Corp – Following dispute over trade dress with Schering-Plough, Fruit of the Earth announces plan to change its package design: (IP Law360), US: Quanta and its impact on biotechnology: (Holman’s Biotech IP Blog), US: BIO files amicus brief asking CAFC to cabin in scope of KSR and hold that its obvious to try dicta does not abrogate the Deuel standard: In re Kubin: (Patently-O), US: StemCells gets patent on enriched central… [read post]
14 Sep 2009, 2:52 pm
Equality Duties In the Court of Appeal the argument was whether the Council had breached the three equality duties, covering race, gender and disability, contained in s 71 of the Race Relations Act 1976, s 49A of the Disability Discrimination Act 2005, and s 76A of the Sex Discrimination Act 1976. [read post]