Search for: "B Shaw" Results 381 - 400 of 575
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Jun 2012, 8:00 am by Michael Shumate
Shaw, Ph.D. 117,000 150,063 11,833 19,530 298,426 *These amounts represent credited dividend equivalents and matching gift payments made by the McKesson Foundation. [read post]
29 May 2012, 12:18 pm by Eric Schweibenz
   ALJ Shaw therefore determined that (1) under Commission Rule 210.31(b), RFAs may be deemed admitted if the party to whom the requests are directed fails to respond to the requests; and (2) under Commission Rule 210.15(c), a party that fails to respond to a motion may be deemed to have consented to the granting of the relief asked for in the motion. [read post]
24 May 2012, 4:06 pm by Alex Gasser
Patent No. 6,094,575 did not disclose the first, third, and fourth steps of claim 1, or steps (b), (c), and (f)-(h) of claim 12. [read post]
17 May 2012, 9:09 am by Paul Freehling
Rolls-Royce Corp., 663 F.3d 966, 972 (8th Cir. 2011) (Indiana and Missouri law) (this case was the subject of a recent Seyfarth Shaw trade secrets blog); Tewari De-Ox Syst. v. [read post]
14 May 2012, 7:17 am
If A, being a liveryman, keeps his horse standing idle in the stable, and B, against his wish or without his knowledge, rides or drives it out, it is no answer to A for B to say: ‘Against what loss do you want to be restored? [read post]
10 Apr 2012, 3:00 am
Shaw entered into a contract with Eustis and at the time, Shaw planned to sponsor a CCIP, but had not created it yet. [read post]
6 Apr 2012, 2:45 pm by Colin O'Keefe
The Labor & Employment Report is the first publication on the LexBlog Network from attorneys at Shawe Rosenthal. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 4:57 am by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
The Ninth Circuit’s decision was widely anticipated after the Court agreed to hear this discretionary appeal and has been the subject of prior posts on our Seyfarth Shaw’s Workplace Class Action Blog. [read post]
23 Feb 2012, 9:41 am by Eric Schweibenz
Shaw will be the presiding Administrative Law Judge in this investigation. [read post]
17 Feb 2012, 7:22 am by Brian Shiffrin
The troopers interpreted defendant's response as a refusal to submit to the test and they recorded that refusal on a form pursuant to Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1194(2)(b). [read post]