Search for: "DOE Corporations 1-20"
Results 4961 - 4980
of 5,251
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Aug 2008, 5:01 pm
Grasso was unreasonable compensation.(1) The action was brought under the New York Not-For-Profit Corporation Law (N-PCL). [read post]
28 Aug 2008, 2:15 pm
U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 20, 2008 US v. [read post]
25 Aug 2008, 1:11 am
Ohio June 20, 2007). [read post]
23 Aug 2008, 1:23 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Thinktank Global week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com] Highlights this week included: DRM for streaming music dies a quiet death: (Electronic Frontier Foundation), (Techdirt) CAFC decides Apotex and Impax infringed AstraZeneca’s Prilosec patents: (Law360), (Patent Prospector), (Patent Docs), (GenericsWeb), CAFC upholds lower court’s decision finding USPTO was within its rights to subject a Cooper patent to… [read post]
22 Aug 2008, 8:16 pm
The 2-1 ruling upholds a March 2007 lower court decision. [read post]
18 Aug 2008, 4:19 am
It does have the Border Patrol requirements. [read post]
18 Aug 2008, 3:31 am
There are also instances in which elected officials have accepted large sums of money to do favors for corporations. [read post]
15 Aug 2008, 3:26 pm
"You wouldn't be able to find that anywhere -- in corporate America or elsewhere. [read post]
14 Aug 2008, 8:18 pm
What does this case mean? [read post]
11 Aug 2008, 1:47 pm
First, the data do show that the SLC made a determination to dismiss all claims in 60% of the cases (Table 1). [read post]
7 Aug 2008, 12:49 pm
Aug. 20, 2004). [read post]
7 Aug 2008, 12:15 pm
The example of Yahoo shows that Broadridge does not have a system in place sufficiently robust to catch mistakes that could amount to 20% of the total votes cast. [read post]
7 Aug 2008, 4:40 am
(See 352 NLRB No. 11) Based on statements by the Respondent 's counsel in a March 21, 2007 letter and email submitted in support of the motion, and the Respondent 's failure to file a timely response to the May 20, 2008 Notice to Show Cause, the Board found that the Respondent does not contest any of the allegations set forth in the amended compliance specification. [read post]
31 Jul 2008, 6:07 pm
Time constraints won't allow me today to cover the decision in detail, but here are a few key parts that deserve closer treatment when time allows: 1. [read post]
31 Jul 2008, 2:11 pm
Why does this matter? [read post]
30 Jul 2008, 4:30 pm
Grandma’s reaction to 2 girls 1 cup. [read post]
27 Jul 2008, 12:38 pm
Under the facts of the hypothetical, the VC cannot gain from the low-risk strategy, but stands to lose $20 if the strategy fails. [read post]
25 Jul 2008, 9:22 am
What does this say about customer service that customer service reps reps don’t have corporate e-mail accounts? [read post]
18 Jul 2008, 1:52 pm
; Milk Does". [read post]
18 Jul 2008, 8:34 am
: (The IP ADR Blog), ACTA plans do not include iPod frisking: (Out-Law), Europe may put ACTA back on faster track: (Intellectual Property Watch), USTR posts ACTA submissions: (Michael Geist), (Vol 1 - IP Justice), (Vol 2 – IP Justice), (Vol 3 – IP Justice), (Vol 4 – IP Justice), G8 on IP: (IPKat), IP: A means to an access and benefit-sharing end? [read post]
