Search for: "STATE IN THE INTEREST OF J. S."
Results 541 - 560
of 15,808
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Nov 2017, 8:54 pm
Unlike our other J-1 clients, our client could not pursue her waiver under No Objection Statement or Interest Government Agency (IGA). [read post]
16 Nov 2017, 7:45 am
Carol J. [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 11:57 am
During this one hour webinar, we will discuss: Recent decisions regarding what constitutes adequate consideration for a non-compete The trend toward criminal prosecution of trade secret theft, especially in the international context Interesting decisions determining choice-of-law issues New and pending state and federal legislation This webinar is hosted by Epstein Becker Green and presented by: David J. [read post]
11 Apr 2016, 4:05 am
McMillen, Critical Factors for Stimulating Private Sector Sukuk Markets, (Institutional Investor, Forthcoming).Craig Forcese & Kent Roach, Criminalizing Terrorist Babble: Canada's Dubious New Terrorist Speech Crime, (Alberta Law Review, Vol. 53, No. 1, 2015).Andrew J. [read post]
31 Jul 2023, 4:00 am
Lund, Answers to Fulton's Questions, (Iowa Law Review, Vol. 108, p. 2075, 2023 (symposium)).Deborah Machalow, Screwed But Not Even Kissed: The Parade of Reproductive and Economic Horribles Likely to Follow Dobbs, (Journal of Gender, Race and Justice, Vol. 26, No. 1, 2023).Mehdi J. [read post]
29 May 2020, 6:03 am
— Donald J. [read post]
3 Nov 2017, 6:54 am
Brady and James J. [read post]
21 Jan 2022, 2:17 pm
The $26 billion settlements with J&J and the distributors would resolve claims that the three distributors allegedly failed to fulfill their legal duty to refuse to ship opioids to pharmacies that submitted suspicious drug orders, and that J&J allegedly misled patients and doctors about the addictive nature of opioid drugs. [read post]
21 Jan 2022, 2:17 pm
The $26 billion settlements with J&J and the distributors would resolve claims that the three distributors allegedly failed to fulfill their legal duty to refuse to ship opioids to pharmacies that submitted suspicious drug orders, and that J&J allegedly misled patients and doctors about the addictive nature of opioid drugs. [read post]
22 Jun 2017, 6:44 pm
The Department of State’s policy allows for that process in instances where the J-2 dependent obtains a divorce form the J-1 principal, the J-1 principal dies, or in cases where the J-2 dependent turns 21, which is our client’s case. [read post]
19 Apr 2012, 9:00 am
Some newly published books of interest: Andrews, Lori, I Know Who You Are and I Saw What You Did: Social Networks and the Death of Privacy (Free Press, 2012).Cascardi, Anthony J., Cervantes, Literature, and the Discourse of Politics (University of Toronto Press, 2012).Chong, Sylvia, Sin Huey, The Oriental Obscene: Violence and Racial Fantasies in the Vietnam Era (Duke University Press, 2012). [read post]
19 Feb 2021, 1:36 am
Libya applied to set aside the parts of Teare J’s order dispensing with service on the basis that s.12(1) of the State Immunity Act requires service though the FCO of “any writ or other document required to be served for instituting proceedings against a State”. [read post]
6 Aug 2010, 9:40 am
By Michael J. [read post]
14 Jun 2018, 8:18 am
Trump’s personal and business interests, and violations of basic legal obligations for non-profit foundations. [read post]
1 Oct 2014, 7:47 am
The interest rates on the loans exceeded caps imposed by New York State law. [read post]
13 May 2007, 11:44 pm
J. 48***Charles S. [read post]
8 Mar 2018, 9:33 pm
” It wouldn’t be fair and balanced of me if I didn’t include here, J&J’s official response to these suits, so here it is: “We … believe our actions regarding the medicine have been appropriate, responsible and in the best interests of patients. [read post]
8 Mar 2018, 9:33 pm
” It wouldn’t be fair and balanced of me if I didn’t include here, J&J’s official response to these suits, so here it is: “We … believe our actions regarding the medicine have been appropriate, responsible and in the best interests of patients. [read post]
5 Dec 2019, 6:38 am
Edited by Gary J. [read post]
2 Jul 2021, 4:27 am
So it's not exactly a patent case, but it deals with interesting questions about what an applicant or patentee can and can't do to protect their invention when novelty or inventiveness is in doubt.The issue of the validity of the UK designation of the patent in suit was held to be invalid as long ago as July 2007 by the late Pumfrey J held ([2007] EWHC 1538 (Pat)). [read post]
