Search for: "Does, A-H" Results 3241 - 3260 of 16,618
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Apr 2007, 4:52 pm
Whatever else it does on the immigration front this year, Congress should at least stir itself to pass this bill or something similar. [read post]
11 Feb 2008, 11:56 am
 It does not apply to the H-2B temporary visa program, for non-agricultural seasonal and temporary labor, nor does it apply to the H-1B program for professionals and highly skilled workers. [read post]
13 Jan 2023, 12:03 pm by Eugene Volokh
" By stating, "[H]ere come your masser (sic)," SEB did not threaten CNN, and the evidence does not support that she intended her words to generate violence. [read post]
16 Apr 2015, 3:31 pm by Stephen Bilkis
Penal Law § 260.10 (1) provides that a person endangers the welfare of a child when "[h]e knowingly acts in a manner likely to be injurious to the physical, mental or moral welfare of a child less than seventeen years old. [read post]
24 Aug 2007, 1:42 pm
In October 2002, the plaintiffs sued H&R Block, and H&R Block moved to compel arbitration. [read post]
17 Jan 2019, 6:39 am by Haley Claxton
The SBA cited 13 C.F.R. 124.503(h)(2), which applies when an order was set-aside for 8(a) participants, but the underlying contract was not. [read post]
5 Oct 2015, 7:21 am by Jonathan H. Adler
Calling upon the House to do what it claims to have already done does not cut it. [read post]
20 Jan 2017, 9:02 am by Jonathan H. Adler
— so that such legislation does not create a partisan windfall.) [read post]
16 Oct 2012, 11:01 am by Gene Quinn
Everyone knows the Federal Circuit will eventually decide these cases that don't settle, so what other than needless cost does a district court proceeding add with respect to issues already fully and fairly litigated at the ITC? [read post]
16 Oct 2012, 11:01 am by Gene Quinn
Everyone knows the Federal Circuit will eventually decide these cases that don't settle, so what other than needless cost does a district court proceeding add with respect to issues already fully and fairly litigated at the ITC? [read post]
16 Aug 2020, 6:47 pm by Daniel Schwartz
The new rule states: “Effective immediately, any person in a public place in Connecticut, whether indoors or outdoors, who does not maintain a safe social distance of approximately six feet from every other person shall cover their mouth and nose with a mask or cloth face-covering. [read post]