Search for: "PRICE v. CORPORATION COMMISSION"
Results 561 - 580
of 915
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Sep 2012, 5:03 pm
The case is Muldrow v. [read post]
31 Aug 2012, 10:19 am
In Muldrow v. [read post]
29 Aug 2012, 10:09 pm
(“Merck”) (formerly Schering-Plough Corporation) restricted competition in violation of the Sherman Act by settling patent infringement lawsuits against potential generic K-DUR entrants, including Upsher-Smith Laboratories (“Upsher-Smith”). [read post]
29 Aug 2012, 12:10 pm
If there was interest, the firm would offer to purchase shares in the concern at prices that were greatly lower than market value. [read post]
16 Aug 2012, 1:46 pm
The case is U.S. v. [read post]
16 Aug 2012, 1:46 pm
The case is U.S. v. [read post]
15 Aug 2012, 7:49 am
- http://bit.ly/MWxSL5 (iTechPost) Apple v. [read post]
15 Aug 2012, 7:49 am
- http://bit.ly/MWxSL5 (iTechPost) Apple v. [read post]
15 Aug 2012, 7:49 am
- http://bit.ly/MWxSL5 (iTechPost) Apple v. [read post]
15 Aug 2012, 7:49 am
- http://bit.ly/MWxSL5 (iTechPost) Apple v. [read post]
14 Aug 2012, 5:01 am
In Finn v. [read post]
12 Aug 2012, 7:55 pm
Jumper practices in the areas of corporate, securities and franchise law. [read post]
9 Aug 2012, 7:30 am
In Weingand v. [read post]
8 Aug 2012, 5:29 am
Samsung: Lack of Custodian Follow-Up+Failure to Suspend Auto-Deletion of Email=Adverse Inference - http://bit.ly/MaaYhA (@LegalHoldPro) Who's Tweeting live from the Apple v Samsung trial? [read post]
18 Jul 2012, 12:20 pm
In Dixon v. [read post]
27 Jun 2012, 6:25 pm
The decision is Williams v. [read post]
18 Jun 2012, 11:47 am
Copyright 2012 by The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. (800-372-1033) NEW TOP-LEVEL DOMAINS The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers will post June 13 a list of over 1,900 applications for new generic top-level domain names, following years of debate and months of delays. [read post]
13 Jun 2012, 1:26 pm
The publishers allegedly committed the offense by collectively agreeing to discontinue their former wholesale distribution models, under which publishers sold eBooks at wholesale prices to distributors who in turn set retail prices, for a new agency model under which publishers set prices with distributors receiving sales commissions.[3] The Canadian plaintiffs also allege that the publisher defendants illegally agreed not to set eBook prices below… [read post]
11 Jun 2012, 3:39 pm
Court of Appeals in Cincinnati has ruled that Robinson-Patman Act claims should not have been dismissed against retail electricity service provider Duke Energy Corporation for discriminating in price between different purchasers through Duke subsidiaries and an affiliated company. [read post]
11 Jun 2012, 3:40 am
The Commission did not uphold the complaint as it explains in some detail in its adjudication here. [read post]
