Search for: "US v. Shields"
Results 3741 - 3760
of 4,943
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Jun 2011, 4:05 am
The Court confirmed that the FMLA does not shield an employee from termination if the employee was allegedly involved in misconduct related to the use of FMLA leave. [read post]
22 Oct 2021, 2:55 pm
From Judge Joshua Wolson's opinion yesterday in Alchem Inc. v. [read post]
18 Aug 2010, 1:35 am
It's getting on for five months since the Court of Justice of the European Union gave its ruling in Case C-278/08 Die BergSpechte Outdoor Reisen und Alpinschule Edi Koblmüller GmbH v Günter Guni and trekking.at Reisen GmbH (see the IPKat here) -- the court's other ruling on the use of trade marks and other allusive symbols as keywords in the same week as it gave its famous ruling in the three Google France cases (noted by the IPKat here). [read post]
10 Jun 2011, 4:05 am
The Court confirmed that the FMLA does not shield an employee from termination if the employee was allegedly involved in misconduct related to the use of FMLA leave. [read post]
21 May 2018, 6:25 am
Moreover, the mere fact that she complained about her coworker shortly before her termination “does not shield her from the consequences of her own actions,” noted the appeals court, and she failed to discredit the employer’s proffered evidence that she was fired over allegations that she was mistreating and threatening patients (Theriault v. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 8:12 am
Visitors often look quizzically at the inscriptions because, where they would expect to see the letter “u,” they see “v. [read post]
24 Apr 2019, 5:24 am
” Wilkison v. [read post]
10 Oct 2011, 8:00 pm
Fehrnstrom for fraudulent use of its services. [read post]
8 Feb 2007, 2:43 am
(Parker v. [read post]
8 Feb 2019, 7:12 am
They claim that the defendant uses a system that “shields its youngest employees from layoff. [read post]
6 Aug 2013, 4:15 am
Expect this concept to morph into provision requiring USPTO to uses Philips v. [read post]
7 Jun 2013, 8:43 am
Thus, secured creditors can take comfort in knowing that following the program discussed in Edgewater will likely mitigate, if not eliminate, the risk that a court may later determine the sale was not commercially reasonable, whereas borrowers can use the case as a shield against disposition strategies that provide lesser safeguards than those used in Edgewater. [read post]
4 Oct 2013, 9:42 pm
United States v. [read post]
9 Nov 2018, 8:27 am
Additional Resources: Zuckerman v. [read post]
14 Jul 2009, 9:00 pm
The Jewel v. [read post]
26 Jun 2017, 11:52 am
The plaintiff in Gil v. [read post]
20 Apr 2017, 8:00 am
Gerasi v. [read post]
24 Aug 2021, 1:12 pm
See Baxter v. [read post]
30 Sep 2010, 6:23 pm
In the recent case of Standard Insurance Company v. [read post]
28 Jul 2021, 4:28 am
Next Steps The guidelines appear to be part of the EDPB’s broader response to the Schrems II decision issued by the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”), which invalidated the EU-US Privacy Shield framework, as well as a response to some industry initiatives to create codes of conduct for transfers (e.g., the EU Cloud COC’s initiative to expand the scope of their code to transfers, as discussed here). [read post]
