Search for: "Vigil v. United States"
Results 501 - 520
of 550
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Dec 2012, 3:21 pm
Some states require the plaintiff to provide a specific trade secret disclosure document before discovery commences. [read post]
20 Dec 2012, 3:21 pm
Some states require the plaintiff to provide a specific trade secret disclosure document before discovery commences. [read post]
31 Aug 2016, 8:27 pm
The probationer’s lawyer should examine the extent to which the probation violation report does not state a possible probation violation at all (see White v. [read post]
22 Jan 2015, 10:15 am
For example, the Service Contract Act (“SCA”), 41 U.S.C. chapter 67, is applicable to certain Federal contracts and subcontracts that utilize service employees to furnish services in the United States. [read post]
25 May 2020, 9:04 pm
They showcase how consolidated action, unifying on a narrow set of priorities and staying vigilant can defeat any incoming threats. [read post]
16 Nov 2014, 8:00 am
Moore v. [read post]
10 Jul 2008, 4:16 am
" (Gregg v. [read post]
29 Mar 2024, 6:00 am
Supreme Court’s ruling in Illinois Brick Co. v. [read post]
10 Jun 2020, 3:55 pm
Accordingly, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit—the decisions of which are binding on the University of California—has expressly recognized that expression "related to [read post]
6 Dec 2018, 1:35 pm
For international misappropriation, consider whether you want to pursue relief in the foreign jurisdiction or in the United States. [read post]
3 May 2016, 5:08 pm
This hack led to a putative class action complaint being filed against OPM and others in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in late June, 2015.[6] As in the customer cases discussed above, the gravamen of the employee complaint against OPM is inaction. [read post]
5 Nov 2007, 6:14 am
--An action under paragraph (1)(A) shall be governed under the rules and procedures set forth in section 42121(b) of title 49, United States Code. [read post]
16 Jan 2015, 12:09 pm
I also think the Supreme Court was right in Cohen v. [read post]
21 Apr 2008, 10:44 am
As the US Supreme court explained in Broadrick v. [read post]
29 Aug 2018, 7:21 am
United States, 431 U.S. 324 (1977) and Griggs v. [read post]
23 Apr 2010, 6:09 am
Perennial proxy campaigns, under this new rule, now required to be paid for in large part by the company itself, are not only possible but highly likely for companies in businesses with secular volatility or for businesses facing other long-term challenges, regardless of management’s capability and board vigilance. [read post]
16 Dec 2015, 9:26 am
Specifically, the webinar involved a discussion of non-compete and trade secret issues in Europe and China as compared to the United States. [read post]
22 Nov 2010, 10:05 am
While the letter makes it clear that a fund board cannot delegate its responsibility to make the required determinations, it expressly states that directors do not have to review each transaction in order to make the required determinations. [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 12:31 pm
Another group of courts found that the exclusion was ambiguous or required to be interpreted based on history of the exclusion and looked at the presentations of the insurance industry to the various insurance commissioners in the various states “Doer v. [read post]
26 Jan 2011, 12:54 am
These unlawful marketing activities were responsible for Pfizer paying the largest fine in United States history. [read post]
