Search for: "M C I Communications Services Inc"
Results 21 - 40
of 528
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 May 2019, 1:38 pm
Tushnet,” I’m stating my name—but there are apparently cases so holding. [read post]
The Cost Corner: Government Contracts Cost and Pricing – Compensation for Personal Services (Part I)
29 Feb 2024, 2:29 pm
”[19] The best practice for meeting this requirement is to implement and consistently follow a written compensation plan that is clearly communicated to employees. [read post]
5 Apr 2012, 2:33 pm
So, on balance, I'm characterizing this opinion as a loss for the UGC community because this ruling increases the industry's costs even if the substantive contours of 512 don't change. [read post]
5 Dec 2017, 12:01 pm
Barry I. [read post]
3 Jul 2012, 9:46 am
I’m at extension 3697. [read post]
12 Jun 2015, 10:49 am
I imagine the plaintiffs will do just that, although I’m skeptical they will find greater success on the next go-around. [read post]
10 Apr 2017, 5:29 am
LiveJournal Inc., No. 14-56596 (9th Cir. [read post]
6 Jun 2018, 5:17 pm
She said 'I'm about to post it.' I began pleading with Christal to slow down. [read post]
25 Apr 2015, 8:12 am
I’m struggling to see how Hood’s stated objectives advance his constituents’ interests at all, and I doubt even more how those objectives became a high enough priority to trump the many other important functions that state AGs should be performing. [read post]
27 Dec 2011, 8:19 am
Veoh’s community? [read post]
21 Feb 2012, 11:30 am
Power Ventures, Inc., et al., C 08-05780 JW (N.D. [read post]
5 May 2023, 10:24 am
C-4365 (July 27, 2012), as modified by Order Modifying Prior Decision and Order, In the Matter of Facebook, Inc., Docket No. [read post]
4 May 2017, 4:00 am
No person shall (a) make a false or misleading statement tending to discredit the business, wares or services of a competitor; The seminal C&D case from the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”), S & S Industries Inc. v Rowell[2], established the test for section 7(a) as follows: A false or misleading statement; Tending to discredit the business, wares or services of a competitor; and Resulting damage Significantly, this SCC decision held that… [read post]
9 Jun 2010, 2:14 am
Portmedia Inc. / TRUEROOTS.COM c/o Nameview Inc. [read post]
27 Feb 2014, 10:10 am
The genesis of the volitional conduct test is the famous Netcom decision,4 penned in 1995 by District Judge Ronald M. [read post]
22 Dec 2013, 10:49 am
I’m not sure what this means, but I’m sure that 47 USC 230(c)(2) protects browser blocking decisions, and I think the First Amendment applies too. [read post]
26 Jun 2009, 6:53 am
I'm sure Professor Goldman will have something to say about this one. [read post]
23 Sep 2013, 12:50 pm
Ryan M. [read post]
15 Nov 2010, 9:58 am
, Inc. and IronPort Systems, LLC, Case No. [read post]
8 May 2008, 12:01 pm
David M. [read post]
