Search for: "DDC v. State"
Results 21 - 40
of 52
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Feb 2008, 4:22 pm
Patent attorney Jill Browning attended today’s Tafas v. [read post]
13 Jul 2014, 11:00 pm
The Court of Appeal in the case of Arewa Textiles Plc & Others v. [read post]
25 Jan 2021, 8:34 am
Google (DDC 2014). [read post]
4 Feb 2022, 12:16 pm
Circuit released a second opinion by Judge Jackson in an argued case: Wye Oak Technology v. [read post]
15 Mar 2017, 6:51 am
Moreover, regulations interpreting the FEPA differ a bit from the ADA in stating that a reasonable accommodation requires analyzing whether certain qualifications or criteria can be “waived or modified. [read post]
1 May 2007, 12:30 am
In Larsen v. [read post]
4 Jan 2022, 10:18 am
(See Corley v Burger King Corp., 56 F3d 709, 710 [5th Cir 1995]; Martin v Savage Truck Line, 121 F Supp 417, 419 [DDC 1954]). [read post]
21 Apr 2014, 7:28 am
In Hamdi v. [read post]
5 Oct 2010, 10:10 pm
--Schuler v PriceWaterhouseCoopers, LLP, DDC, September 22, 2010: An employee who filed suit as an individual, non-class plaintiff could not maintain an ADEA “pattern and practice” claim, ruled a federal district court in granting the employer’s motion for summary judgment on remand. [read post]
11 May 2010, 2:07 pm
National Railway Passenger Corp., 653 F Supp, 376 (DDC 1987), and Pierson v. [read post]
IGT Petitions for En Banc Rehearing: Asking Court to Allow Invalidity Defense for "Improper Revival"
7 Oct 2008, 8:17 am
Aristocrat v. [read post]
9 Aug 2010, 5:26 pm
Thomson and BMC v. [read post]
16 Oct 2006, 9:44 pm
KSR v. [read post]
29 Jan 2018, 11:12 am
The author contrasts Judge Bates’ view that the provisions of the DMCA provide enough protection for privacy rights (in Re Verizon DDC 2003) with Judge Garcia’s position that the harm caused by disclosure would be too great a violation of the users’ privacy rights (in Capitol Records, Inc v Does 1-16). [read post]
18 Nov 2021, 1:03 pm
M.O., No. 21-2164-DDC-ADM, 2021 WL 4476783 (D. [read post]
16 Feb 2024, 4:27 am
” Notably, the Court rejected the Army’s “joint venture” line of argumentation, which has been accepted by some courts in the DDC, and which depends, in my view, on a misreading and misapplication of the principles in Dep’t of the Interior v. [read post]
9 Jul 2014, 10:24 am
Of note, the magistrate concluded that the record showed the OFCCP did not comply with the standard set forth in the DC district court’s 2000 decision in Beverly Enterprises v Herman (79 EPD ¶40,258) regarding the initial selection of BOA for review. [read post]
7 May 2020, 11:09 am
Burwell (DDC). [read post]
3 Aug 2016, 8:26 am
No. 1 v. [read post]
