Search for: "Fluor International, Inc."
Results 21 - 33
of 33
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Apr 2024, 8:24 am
Ltd., 223 Ill. 2d 407, 860 N.E.2d 280 (Ill. 2006) 8 International Flavors & Fragrances, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Oct 2007, 9:14 am
Asbestos Workers Local 84 (DST Insulation, Inc [read post]
9 Apr 2009, 9:27 am
(Spicy IP) Opposing identical trade mark registrations (International Law Office) Ireland Economic stimulus for intellectual property in Ireland (Patent Baristas) Israel Adjudicator at Israel Patent Office rules on late filing of evidence (The IP Factor) Japan Super accelerated examination (IP Frontline) Kenya Kenya exercises power to deal with substandard batteries (Afro-IP) Korea Determining reasonable remuneration for in-service… [read post]
4 Oct 2008, 9:12 pm
Marcionese issued his second supplemental decision July 1, 2008. *** Fluor Daniel, Inc. (15-CA-12544, et al.; 353 NLRB No. 15) Baton Rouge, LA Sept. 25, 2008. [read post]
25 Apr 2016, 12:43 pm
Earlier environmental qui tam cases include a whistleblower win of $4.1 million against Westinghouse Hanford Co. and Fluor Daniel Hanford Inc., alleging contractors overcharged the DOE for cleanup at Hanford Nuclear Reservation in a $240 million case; and a $4.2 million case involving misrepresenting the progress of nuclear cleanup at Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant by Rockwell International. [read post]
25 Apr 2016, 12:43 pm
Earlier environmental qui tam cases include a whistleblower win of $4.1 million against Westinghouse Hanford Co. and Fluor Daniel Hanford Inc., alleging contractors overcharged the DOE for cleanup at Hanford Nuclear Reservation in a $240 million case; and a $4.2 million case involving misrepresenting the progress of nuclear cleanup at Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant by Rockwell International. [read post]
25 Apr 2016, 12:43 pm
Earlier environmental qui tam cases include a whistleblower win of $4.1 million against Westinghouse Hanford Co. and Fluor Daniel Hanford Inc., alleging contractors overcharged the DOE for cleanup at Hanford Nuclear Reservation in a $240 million case; and a $4.2 million case involving misrepresenting the progress of nuclear cleanup at Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant by Rockwell International. [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 4:44 am
Rockwell International Corp., 755 F. [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 2:00 am
(Class 46) India Chennai IP Appellate Board: Well-known trademarks - consumer recollection is key: Societe des Produits Nestle SA v Jai ram (International Law Office) Bombay High Court rules on the infringement of copyright in drawings: Indiana Gratings Private Limited & Anr v Anand Udyog Fabricators Private Limited & Ors (Spicy IP) Is ‘science’ essential for creating patent lawyers: some ‘general’ thoughts (Spicy IP)… [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 2:00 am
(Class 46) India Chennai IP Appellate Board: Well-known trademarks - consumer recollection is key: Societe des Produits Nestle SA v Jai ram (International Law Office) Bombay High Court rules on the infringement of copyright in drawings: Indiana Gratings Private Limited & Anr v Anand Udyog Fabricators Private Limited & Ors (Spicy IP) Is ‘science’ essential for creating patent lawyers: some ‘general’ thoughts (Spicy IP)… [read post]
17 Jan 2014, 9:50 am
Construction and maintenance giant Fluor Corporation reported revenues of $27.6 billion in 2012. [read post]
29 Feb 2012, 8:25 am
Some of the other factors (which could be expressed as objective or subjective probabilities) include: accuracy of the data reporting data collection data categorization data cleaning data handling data analysis internal validity of the study external validity of the study credibility of study participants credibility of study researchers credibility of the study authors accuracy of the study authors’ expression o [read post]
14 Feb 2010, 7:18 pm
Click Here Lionel Harris Oil Company, Inc. [read post]
