Search for: "Ives v. State"
Results 201 - 220
of 7,551
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Dec 2023, 2:48 pm
State-registered advisers need to examine their states’ regulations to determine who constitutes a “client. [read post]
18 Dec 2023, 6:08 am
From Linthicum v. [read post]
17 Dec 2023, 11:12 am
These stated variously a. [read post]
14 Dec 2023, 9:01 pm
In 2017, NYDFS was one of the first state financial regulators to impose cybersecurity requirements on covered entities. [read post]
14 Dec 2023, 9:01 am
See Section 191-d (7)(b)(i) and (v). [read post]
12 Dec 2023, 12:55 pm
In State v. [read post]
12 Dec 2023, 7:43 am
Lawyers who engage in discriminatory conduct can also be sanctioned under the state analogs to Rule 8.4(g). [read post]
11 Dec 2023, 8:33 pm
”[16] However, the experience of the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) should serve as a cautionary tale. [read post]
10 Dec 2023, 5:23 pm
Radke v. [read post]
8 Dec 2023, 1:42 am
Finally, Part IV will examine possible legal and social resolutions to deter the efforts of removal of murals and gentrification. [read post]
7 Dec 2023, 6:00 pm
The five judge Bench's decision of the Supreme Court of India in Cox & Kings v. [read post]
7 Dec 2023, 12:41 pm
(We cover this ground in Part IV of our series.) [read post]
6 Dec 2023, 2:35 am
The HKEX stated that issuers’ boards that are only composed by members of one gender will be in contravention of its Listing Rules. [read post]
5 Dec 2023, 6:00 am
V. [read post]
4 Dec 2023, 5:29 pm
As SCOTUS explains in Plyler v. [read post]
2 Dec 2023, 12:22 pm
Hodges v. [read post]
1 Dec 2023, 11:16 am
” State’s Interest. [read post]
28 Nov 2023, 3:39 am
They include the following: Standard AI good practice: (i) safety, security and robustness; (ii) appropriate transparency and explainability; (iii) fairness; (iv) accountability and governance; and (v) contestability and redress. [read post]
27 Nov 2023, 1:25 am
The Guidelines currently require that, when amending or adapting the description in line with the claims, the applicant must either delete subject matter not covered by the claims, or explicitly state in the description that such subject matter is not part of the invention (F-IV, 4.3). [read post]
23 Nov 2023, 1:42 am
In so doing, the court relied on the Division Bench[1]Novartis AG v. [read post]
