Search for: "AMP, INC. v. United States" Results 5501 - 5520 of 11,017
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Oct 2013, 11:06 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Smith & Nephew, Inc., 688 F.3d 1342, 1366 (Fed. [read post]
7 Oct 2013, 11:01 am by Bexis
One aspect of the ACA is the envisioned effect of the United States Preventive Services Task Force (here’s the USPSTF’s website) role in evaluating screening methods. [read post]
7 Oct 2013, 6:44 am by Joy Waltemath
The employees contend that the Seventh Circuit’s decision conflicted with the First Circuit’s holding in Tum v Barber Foods, Inc and, more importantly, with the High Court’s decision in IBP, Inc v Alvarez. [read post]
1 Oct 2013, 11:41 am by Schachtman
Personnel records allowed me to establish that Onondaga Pottery had hired a young scientist, Edward Schramm, in the 1930’s, from the United States Bureau of Standards. [read post]
1 Oct 2013, 7:46 am by Lyle Denniston
  Justice Elena Kagan is not participating in this case. * United States v. [read post]
28 Sep 2013, 11:08 am by Schachtman
First, the district saw through the argument that the claimed benzene-APL LNT model was good science because the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) relies upon it. [read post]
27 Sep 2013, 12:39 pm by WIMS
[#Energy, #Land, #CA3]Waste Information & Management Services, Inc. [read post]
24 Sep 2013, 5:16 pm by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer
Employers and other employee benefit plan sponsors, benefit plan fiduciaries, and their advisors and service providers should review and update their health and employee benefit plan’s definitions of “spouse,” “marriage” and “dependent” in light of new guidance from the Department of Labor Wage & Hour Division (WHD) guidance under the Family & Medical Leave Act and the Employee Benefit Security Administration (EBSA)… [read post]
23 Sep 2013, 12:50 pm by Mary Jane Wilmoth
Fuqi International, Inc. and Yu Kwai ChongCase number: 13-cv-0995 (United States District Court for the District of Columbia)Case filed: July 1, 2013Qualifying judgment/order: August 7, 2013 8/16/2013 11/14/2013 2013-68 SEC v. [read post]