Search for: "TARGET CORPORATION v. US " Results 241 - 260 of 2,523
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Mar 2012, 11:01 am by Lyle Denniston
  A ruling on the “circumstances” that may be the target of an ATS case would also potentially include whether corporations may be targeted, it would appear. [read post]
16 Apr 2012, 12:23 pm by Brian Hall
Nosal that the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act ("CFAA") was not intended to cover employee misappropriation of trade secrets, violations of corporate computer use policies or violations of an employee duty of loyalty. [read post]
23 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm by renholding
The Court of Chancery noted in Moelis that “greater statutory guidance may be beneficial” in light of the “expansive” use of such agreements between corporations and their stockholders. [read post]
23 Apr 2023, 5:53 am by Kevin LaCroix
Acamar Partners Acquisition Corporation is a SPAC that completed its IPO in February 2019. [read post]
10 Aug 2022, 9:05 pm by Eduardo Gallardo
However, absent SEC intervention the target corporation may be limited in its ability to seek remedy against an activist that fails to satisfy the minimum guardrail requirements of the SEC universal proxy rules. [read post]
28 Jul 2022, 10:02 am by Eric Goldman
In a footnote, the court says the analysis might differ if the filtered words targeted criticism or subject-specific comments. [read post]
24 Mar 2016, 7:00 am by Docket Navigator
The methods of [one patent-in-suit] 'address the problem of ensuring that Internet search engines retrieve not only Web pages and documents written in the query language (source), but in foreign (target) languages as well.' The methods of the [other] patent perform translingual searches and use them to display cross-language advertising to the user of the search engine.'" Improved Search LLC v. [read post]
18 Sep 2010, 9:49 am by Marta Requejo
“I’ve now had a chance to read a little more closely the decision, majority and concurrence, in Kiobel v. [read post]
12 Jun 2019, 6:18 am
Ch. 2013), the RSI Court held that under the terms of the parties’ merger agreement, pre-merger communications between the target company’s owners and representatives and the target company’s counsel could not be used by the buyer in a post-closing dispute. [read post]