Search for: "C&S Engineers Incorporated" Results 261 - 280 of 537
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
31 Mar 2016, 11:36 am by Mark Astarita
 Separately, in a complaint filed in federal court in the Northern District of Illinois, the SEC charged former Navistar CEO Daniel C. [read post]
19 Feb 2016, 3:03 pm by Orin Kerr
Apple’s challenge will likely focus on the scope of a judge’s power under a federal law called the All Writs Act (AWA). [read post]
Internet of Things The term “Internet of Things” is arguably a misnomer in today’s rapidly changing technical environment. [read post]
1 Feb 2016, 3:52 am by Ken Chasse
Hogg, of Osgoode Hall Law School at York University (Toronto), in, Constitutional Law of Canada 5th Edition (Thomson Canada Limited, 2007) Volume 1, sections 5.5(c), and 8.8, (see also the abridged Student Edition 2015, however on these issues, it does not appear to alter what is stated in Professor Hogg’s main work). [read post]
28 Jan 2016, 7:03 am by Camilla Alexandra Hrdy
P. 26(c)(1)(G), a court may "issue an order . . . requiring that a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information not be revealed or be revealed only in a specified way. [read post]
22 Jan 2016, 4:08 am by INFORRM
Nonetheless, the landmark decision of the ECJ in the Google Spain case [2013] EUECJ C-131/12 appears to have breathed new life into ss 10 and 14 DPA as a means to obtain injunctive relief against ISPs. [read post]
25 Nov 2015, 6:41 am
In the 1980's, the Nagle family also established CDS Engineers, Inc. [read post]
20 Nov 2015, 8:59 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Grimaldi: very defendant-protective, and the reason courts do this is that they see the speech value of allowing people to incorporate TMs into expressive works. [read post]
29 Oct 2015, 3:00 am by Daphne Keller
  Privacy regulators seem to agree: the Article 29 Working Party, reviewing cases brought to DPAs, concluded that “in the great majority of cases the refusal by a search engine to accede to the request is justified. [read post]
17 Oct 2015, 5:29 am by Schachtman
In Joiner, the high Court rejected WOE, over the dissent of a single justice,[5] but some of the inferior federal courts have embraced the dissent to the exclusion of the majority’s clear holding, as well as the incorporation of that holding into the revised Rule 702.[6] An interesting case of judicial disregard. [read post]