Search for: "Oxley, in Re"
Results 341 - 360
of 475
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Dec 2008, 9:34 am
They're often more complicated than large commercial litigation or breach of fiduciary duty cases. [read post]
18 Dec 2008, 5:00 pm
And now we're asking taxpayers to bet. [read post]
12 Dec 2008, 4:00 pm
Davis (In re Digimarc Corp. [read post]
1 Dec 2008, 2:46 am
Magistri (In re Invision Technologies Inc. [read post]
23 Nov 2008, 4:54 am
We continue to be of the view that some disclosures of non-GAAP financial measures could give rise to actions under Rule 10b-5.Section 3(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act provides that a violation of that Act or the Commission's rules thereunder shall be treated for all purposes as a violation of the Exchange Act. [read post]
11 Nov 2008, 9:46 pm
They're sitting there with huge piles of money. [read post]
26 Oct 2008, 5:58 am
"They're both GAAP numbers . . . [read post]
2 Oct 2008, 7:43 pm
Biden’s re-election campaign as well as for Carper at the grunt level of getting out the vote and dropping literature. [read post]
15 Sep 2008, 1:24 am
Today, we're starting at 60 and going to maybe 70 or 80, at best (worst)? [read post]
12 Sep 2008, 9:19 am
"In re Ceridian Corp. [read post]
18 Aug 2008, 11:55 am
Increasingly, they're grooming their own legal team to compete in the heated China market.Bilingual American lawyers with international law firm experience are the hot tickets for U.S. companies conducting business in China. [read post]
24 Jul 2008, 3:07 am
It is also clear that SEC regulations, especially Sarbanes Oxley, are totally worthless in preventing or detecting fraud. [read post]
22 Jul 2008, 12:27 pm
State of Restatements In this report posted on our "Restatements" Practice Area, it appears as if perhaps Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley has had a positive effect on improving the quality of financial reporting (as well as quality of internal controls) at companies generally since restatements are now trending down, at least for companies over $75 million in market capitalization. [read post]
19 Jul 2008, 12:10 am
If no page loads, you're fine. [read post]
15 Jul 2008, 2:39 pm
There is going to be more fraud if the calculation is going to be "heads I win, tails we're even. [read post]
25 Jun 2008, 2:02 pm
In re Sapient Corp. [read post]
3 Jun 2008, 2:48 am
Sarbanes-Oxley's section 404, although several years later in time, creates federal disclosure requirements around internal controls and procedures - the same type of systems at issue in Caremark. [read post]
23 May 2008, 1:03 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Thinktank Global week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com] Highlights this week included: Indian Patent Office decisions now searchable and downloadable: (Indian Patent Oppositions), (Generic Pharmaceuticals & IP), (Spicy IP), Institute for Progress study on inter partes re-examination: (Peter Zura's 271 Patent Blog), (IAM), (Hal Wegner) Nintendo loses patent suit over 3D controller; Anascape awarded $21M in damages:… [read post]
22 May 2008, 6:08 am
” "Commitment to your clients: “If you’re not committed to your clients, then you’re in the wrong business. [read post]
14 May 2008, 5:19 am
...but if you are a multi-million dollar corporation (and therefore subject to Sarbanes-Oxley) you might want to hire an expert, not a dummy.From the product description on Amazon:Whether you're a CEO or a file clerk, it's important to understand Sarbanes-Oxley, the post-Enron legislation aimed at keeping corporations honest and ethical. [read post]
