Search for: "Reading v. Attorney General" Results 2901 - 2920 of 14,160
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Jun 2014, 7:06 am by Sandra Park
  The decision can be read as a straightforward application of the Court’s recent Section 101 decisions in Bilski v. [read post]
19 Feb 2016, 10:05 am by Eric Goldman
In the latest ruling, the court partially grants Filer’s California anti-SLAPP motion to strike but denies attorneys’ fees to both sides (even though I believe Filer nevertheless should get attorneys’ fees for the pieces she won–see, e.g., Wong v. [read post]
17 May 2021, 1:03 pm by Kevin LaCroix
”[v] Indeed, following Wilkinson, Delaware courts have generally deferred to a shareholder’s asserted purpose unless it is obvious that the shareholder “[i]s a passive conduit in a purely lawyer-driven inspection effort. [read post]
28 Sep 2023, 4:00 am by Anil Kalhan
First, Attorney General Jeff Sessions sent a vague, one-page letter to Acting DHS Secretary Elaine Duke informing her that DHS “should” rescind DACA because, Sessions asserted, the initiative had been “effectuated . . . [read post]
13 Jul 2023, 8:00 am by Chris Dippel
 Criminal defense attorneys and federal prosecutors alike were anxiously awaiting the result in Dubin v. [read post]
12 Nov 2015, 6:43 pm by Jarod Bona
Ronwin); and (3) a board controlled by attorneys prohibits attorney advertising and deters attorneys from engaging in price competition (Bates v. [read post]
12 Nov 2015, 6:43 pm by Jarod Bona
Ronwin); and (3) a board controlled by attorneys prohibits attorney advertising and deters attorneys from engaging in price competition (Bates v. [read post]
12 Nov 2015, 6:43 pm by Jarod Bona
Ronwin); and (3) a board controlled by attorneys prohibits attorney advertising and deters attorneys from engaging in price competition (Bates v. [read post]
13 May 2011, 3:38 pm by Paul Karlsgodt
  As a prime example, he points to the controversial proposed settlement in a class action involving DirectBuy to which 36 attorneys general and a consumer rights organization have objected. [read post]