Search for: "First Standard Construction" Results 421 - 440 of 11,238
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 May 2014, 9:44 am by The Murray Law Firm
Were construction loads placed on the concrete structure without an employer receiving approval from a qualified structural design professional, in compliance with OSHA concrete standards? [read post]
14 Apr 2023, 1:41 pm by James S. Friedman, LLC
The post Ethical Standards at the US Supreme Court Continue to Erode appeared first on New Jersey Criminal Defense Attorney Blog. [read post]
10 Nov 2009, 5:29 am by William J. Broderick
The first net operating income test from the loan agreement did not come effect until some six months in the future. [read post]
30 Jul 2015, 6:02 am by Kit Case
The post Tragic Cannery And Construction Site Deaths Highlight Need For Safety Enforcement appeared first on Washington Workers' Advisor. [read post]
11 Dec 2015, 6:00 am by Joseph Robinson
Teva’s deferential “clear error” standard did not apply, because the district court did not make any factual findings based on extrinsic evidence in connection with its claim construction. [read post]
10 Apr 2016, 5:30 am by Gene Quinn
The post Misleading argument in Cuozzo suggests district courts use BRI appeared first on IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Patent Law. [read post]
6 Sep 2016, 11:23 am by Arthur F. Coon
The First District Court of Appeal has issued another published decision applying the “substantial evidence” standard of review to a local agency’s decision not to prepare an EIR for approval of revisions to a project for which a Mitigated Negative Declaration was initially prepared. [read post]
16 Jun 2016, 10:42 am by briadm
” The citations were among the first issued under OSHA’s revised confined space standard. [read post]
29 Mar 2018, 9:45 pm by Scott McKeown
The decision to withdraw agency support of the Packard standard signals the first step in moving away from such examination-type analyses in PTAB trial proceedings. [read post]
14 Jun 2016, 6:55 am by Thomas G. Heintzman
Discussion Each of these four cases involved, first, a decision by a Superior Court Judge interpreting an insurance contract (or in Ross-Clair, a construction contract with the federal government), and then a decision of the Court of Appeal reviewing that lower court decision. [read post]
19 Jul 2022, 8:09 am by Dennis Crouch
  The patentee had also argued that the delay was improper because it blew past the 6-month goal set within the Board’s Standard Operating Procedure. [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 5:10 pm by Stuart Kaplow
Dallas is one of the first major cities in the nation to implement comprehensive mandatory green building standards for both all new residential and commercial construction. [read post]
29 Jul 2016, 6:00 am by Christopher G. Hill
My first-year contracts professor, Bill McHugh, told us: “If you want a lawyer who understands contracts, hire a construction lawyer. [read post]
Many of the largest fines against these construction companies in the first quarter of 2022 are for failing to implement better health and safety standards and for not increasing fall protection for its workers, which has lead to the death of many contractors on the job. [read post]
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL DETERMINED A PROJECT TO BUILD ONE SINGLE-FAMILY HOME IS NOT A “HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROJECT” UNDER THE HAA The issue before the Court was did the Plaintiffs’ proposal to build a single-family home qualified as a “housing development project. [read post]
27 Jul 2015, 6:07 pm by LTA-Editor
Teva’s Impact on Standard of Review for Patent Claim Construction The Supreme Court’s ruling in Teva outlines the scope of review for patent claim construction. [read post]
8 May 2018, 4:55 pm by James Yang
The post Claim construction switching from BRI to ordinary meaning in post grant proceedings appeared first on OC Patent Lawyer. [read post]
7 Nov 2016, 7:25 am by Candace Shields
To comment, follow the instructions on the first page of the proposed rule. [read post]
7 Feb 2019, 8:05 am by Pulgini & Norton, LLP
 Because the plaintiffs did not challenge the first and third factor, the only issue was whether they the proposed construction would protect the interests of the wetlands bylaw. [read post]