Search for: "Doe Parties 1-100" Results 2641 - 2660 of 5,021
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Feb 2016, 4:59 am
 makes an electronic communication to such other person or a third party:. . . [read post]
24 Feb 2016, 4:33 pm by Kevin LaCroix
This exemption is subject to the following conditions: the function of the intermediary is limited to providing access to a communication system over which information made available by third parties is transmitted or temporarily stored or hosted; the intermediary does not initiate the transmission or select the receiver of thev transmission and select or modify the information contained in the transmission; the intermediary observes due diligence while discharging his duties. [read post]
24 Feb 2016, 1:21 pm by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
 Under this logic, the EEOC urges the Supreme Court to conclude that dismissal does not constitute the sort of material alteration of the parties’ legal relationship required to confer prevailing party status. [read post]
23 Feb 2016, 3:15 pm by Benjamin Wittes
For example, changes that would provide flexibility in conducting certain proceedings may ease the burden on the parties and facilitate better management of the process. [read post]
23 Feb 2016, 6:51 am by Sean Wajert
 Under CAFA, a federal district court has subject matter jurisdiction “over class actions involving [1] at least 100 members and [2] over $5 million in controversy when [3] minimal diversity is met (between at least one defendant and one plaintiff-class member). [read post]
22 Feb 2016, 4:36 pm by Kevin LaCroix
The Securities Act of 1933 does not permit the SEC to bring an enforcement action on behalf of an individual investor; however, individual investors are permitted to bring civil actions under several of its sections as noted below:   ■ Section 5 and Section 12(a)(1) allow purchasers (investors) to sue issuers for offering or selling a non-exempt security without registering it. [read post]
22 Feb 2016, 10:26 am by Jerry Kalish
That is, an extension of credit between the plan and a “party-in-interest”, the employer as plan sponsor. [read post]
20 Feb 2016, 12:30 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
  1/7 movies viewed through illegal means. [read post]
17 Feb 2016, 7:28 am by John Ehrett
  Our policy is to include and disclose all cases in which Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, represents either a party or an amicus in the case, with the exception of the rare cases in which Goldstein & Russell represents the respondent(s) but does not appear on the briefs in the case. [read post]
16 Feb 2016, 7:36 am by Susan Hennessey
The parties have filed 207 exhibits and more than 100 declarations alleging facts and providing references to inform the Judge’s consideration of these issues. [read post]
Are you saying that the contract between these two parties does not provide for arbitration but now the parties have agreed to arbitrate? [read post]
10 Feb 2016, 8:52 am by Douglas A. Berman
In particular, Senator Cotton is 100% right that our national data on the recidivism rates and realities of federal offe [read post]
7 Feb 2016, 10:01 pm by Cookson Beecher
“Global hectarage has increased more than 100-fold since the first plantings of biotech crops. [read post]
5 Feb 2016, 7:55 am by Schachtman
It is also easily correctable by removing one of the studies from the Group 1 analysis so that instead of 28 out of 35 studies reporting 100% survival rates, only 27 out of 34 do so. [read post]
The proposed revisions were published in the Federal Register on February 1 and interested parties have until April 1, 2016 to provide comments to DOL on the changes. [read post]
Do not expect the law firm representing Sinosure to care about ##1 and 2 above. [read post]
2 Feb 2016, 10:19 pm by WOLFGANG DEMINO
 “We also applaud its willingness to impose lower caps on discretionary markups in a way that does not increase interest rates for borrowers. [read post]
2 Feb 2016, 8:49 am by Benjamin Wittes
Note that this approach does not make a company liable for the activity of third parties; it does not create a cause of action of any kind. [read post]