Search for: "USA v. August" Results 481 - 500 of 797
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Jul 2012, 3:53 pm by Victoria VanBuren
Tygart | Texas Federal Court Will Hear Lance Armstrong Case on August 10, Disputing, July 18, 2012 Armstrong v. [read post]
20 Jul 2012, 9:42 am
The result of this confusion is that LGBT's see themselves as "victims", and people like V. [read post]
18 Jul 2012, 5:57 am by Rob Robinson
.: Taking A Step Back - http://bit.ly/Lt2hP4 (Cynthia Courtney) Plaintiffs v. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 5:35 pm by Victoria VanBuren
Armstrong, (2) the UCI test results in 2001 and 2009–2010, nor (3) over the alleged violations prior to August 2005 that do not involve a positive test. [read post]
7 Jun 2012, 1:04 pm by Joanne Irene Gabrynowicz
 Affiliated to the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology (MCIT), ISA was organized in the form of an autonomous organization mandated to follow and implement the strategies authorized by the Space Supreme Council (SSC).[1] Following the dissolution of SSC in August 2007 and to continue further development and implementation of the statutes and bylaws of ISA, the Council of Ministers of IR Iran approved amendments to the existing law on June 15, 2008 that led to final… [read post]
29 May 2012, 10:02 am by Lyle Denniston
Siemens Medical Solutions USA (11-301), involving a dispute over a patent on a radiation detector used for medical imaging. [read post]
26 May 2012, 4:21 pm
Although the leadership of the Episcopal Church (USA) may treat it as one of its member Dioceses, it has done so only to enable it to become a plaintiff in court as soon as possible. [read post]
4 Apr 2012, 8:48 am by Walter Haines, Esq.
Henshaw and Souza v Home Depot USA Inc. is a California class actions alleging that not all accrued vacation time was paid out upon termination of employment. [read post]
18 Mar 2012, 5:05 pm by Editorial Board
For example: The DOJ forced AT&T to abandon its proposed acquisition of T-Mobile USA after suing to block the transaction in August 2011. [read post]
2 Feb 2012, 2:28 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
The doctrine tolls the limitations period "where there is a mutual understanding of the need for further representation on the specific subject matter underlying the malpractice claim" (McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 306), and " where the continuing representation pertains specifically to [*2][that] matter' " (International Electron Devices [USA] LLC v Menter, Rudin & Trivelpiece, P.C., 71 AD3d 1512, 1513, quoting Shumsky v Eisenstein,… [read post]