Search for: "Defendant Doe 2"
Results 4661 - 4680
of 40,582
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Apr 2022, 5:01 am
This question has famously been at the center of the debates about platform content moderation,[1] but it can come up in other contexts as well.[2] This is a broad question, and there might be no general answer. [read post]
28 Apr 2022, 11:31 pm
So, Epic focuses on Section 2 (unilateral conduct).The relevant theory here is tying, which requires a tying product (where the defendant has monopoly power) and a tied product (which others are forced to buy in order to get the tying product they need). [read post]
28 Apr 2022, 3:52 pm
” DOJ expects to see programs that “(1) are well designed, (2) are adequately resourced and empowered to function effectively, and (3) work in practice. [read post]
28 Apr 2022, 10:34 am
The case is closed and the insurer does not have to pay. [read post]
28 Apr 2022, 4:00 am
In effect, the thing every family lawyer who does marriage contracts fears, happened to Mr. [read post]
28 Apr 2022, 12:00 am
The vehicle’s engine does not need to be running and it does not need to be in traffic lanes but it can be parked. [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 7:28 pm
The court held that (1) Section 15(b) does not restrict defendant’s speech (meaning the First Amendment does not apply), and (2) even if Section 15(b) restricted defendant’s speech, it is a content-neutral restriction that survives the applicable level of First Amendment scrutiny (i.e., intermediate scrutiny). [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 1:12 pm
Favors v Cuomo, 2012 WL 928223 *2, 2012 US Dist LEXIS 36910, *10 [ED NY, Mar. 19, 2012, No. 11-CV-5632, Raggi, Lynch, and Irizarry, JJ.]; Rodriguez v Pataki, 2002 WL 1058054, *7, 2002 US Dist LEXIS, *25-27 [SD NY 2002, May 24, 2002, No. 02 Civ. 618, Walker, Ch. [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 1:12 pm
Favors v Cuomo, 2012 WL 928223 *2, 2012 US Dist LEXIS 36910, *10 [ED NY, Mar. 19, 2012, No. 11-CV-5632, Raggi, Lynch, and Irizarry, JJ.]; Rodriguez v Pataki, 2002 WL 1058054, *7, 2002 US Dist LEXIS, *25-27 [SD NY 2002, May 24, 2002, No. 02 Civ. 618, Walker, Ch. [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 12:56 pm
And in alleging that Defendants retaliated against them by eliminating funding for the LFRD administrative positions, Plaintiffs challenge Defendants' legislative action. [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 12:32 pm
§ 1983; and (2) whether, assuming spending clause statutes ever give rise to private rig [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 11:31 am
Upon conviction, the defendant faces a sentence involving monetary fines as well as imprisonment of up to five (5) years. [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 7:28 am
That rule, promulgated in 1968, identified its authority as sections 2(d) and 2(e) of the Clayton Act, rather than UMC under Section 5 of the FTC Act. [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 5:52 am
” [Again, that’s benefit to defendant, not harm to plaintiff in the Court’s new baseline.] [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 5:51 am
Meanwhile, PG&E was discussing the fire issue with other potential vendors, including what eventually became defendant Reliaguard. [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 5:01 am
But sphere sovereignty does not ineluctably result in hermetically sealed spheres. [read post]
26 Apr 2022, 12:48 pm
But there are some kinds of challenges for cause for which that “expurgatory oath” does not work. [read post]
26 Apr 2022, 12:12 pm
The Health Insurance Marketplaces 2022 Open Enrollment Report (“Report”) published by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services last month reveals the 2022 Open Enrollment Period (“2022 OEP”) produced the highest enrollment in health care marketplace plans since passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) 12 years ago. [read post]
26 Apr 2022, 11:48 am
The Health Insurance Marketplaces 2022 Open Enrollment Report (“Report”) published by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services last month reveals the 2022 Open Enrollment Period (“2022 OEP”) produced the highest enrollment in health care marketplace plans since passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) 12 years ago. [read post]
26 Apr 2022, 7:49 am
Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (“SVR”): SVR has likewise targeted multiple critical infrastructure organizations, although the Advisory does not specify the sectors in which these organizations operate. [read post]
