Search for: "State v. Register"
Results 21 - 40
of 13,578
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 May 2024, 8:17 am
Under Illinois v. [read post]
21 May 2024, 5:55 am
For instance in Tremblay et al. v. [read post]
21 May 2024, 2:45 am
SES is the registered proprietor of the EP 3883277 (EP 277), which relates to the spatial arrangement of components within electronic shelf labels that display price information in sales areas. [read post]
20 May 2024, 8:03 pm
This term stated that customers must “tell us if anything changes while you’re insured with us” (the Notification Clause) (our emphasis) and was included within Product Disclosure Statements (PDSs) issued with approximately 1,377,900 contracts for home and contents insurance policies. [read post]
20 May 2024, 1:07 pm
On May 16, the attorney general himself submitted the notice of proposed rulemaking to the Federal Register. [read post]
20 May 2024, 4:38 am
See Sheetz of Del., Inc. v. [read post]
17 May 2024, 4:29 pm
BrazilBig Pan Bakery v. [read post]
17 May 2024, 2:18 pm
Dairy Export Council et al. v. [read post]
17 May 2024, 4:04 am
" Chestek PLLC v. [read post]
15 May 2024, 7:41 am
Plaintiffs Nealy and MSI claim to own registered copyrights in eight musical works, either as works made for hire or by assignm [read post]
14 May 2024, 7:03 pm
In Popa v. [read post]
13 May 2024, 3:42 pm
Ernst & Ernst v. [read post]
13 May 2024, 3:55 am
” Palm Bay Imps., Inc. v. [read post]
12 May 2024, 11:54 am
Last year, the state court ruled in favor of the 16 youth plaintiffs in Held v. [read post]
12 May 2024, 6:55 am
In Tuskia v. [read post]
12 May 2024, 3:51 am
Timing Rule 262A.3 RoP states that “The Application shall be made at the same time as lodging a document containing the information or evidence and shall provide a copy of the unredacted relevant document and, if applicable, a copy of the redacted document. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
10 May 2024, 6:45 am
See NCAA v. [read post]
10 May 2024, 6:30 am
Justices Leave Door Open to Discovery Rule Copyright Damages — Bloomberg Law’s Kyle Jahner writes about yesterday’s Supreme Court decision in Warner Chappell Music v. [read post]
