Search for: "Companies A, B & C" Results 601 - 620 of 12,834
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Dec 2015, 2:38 pm by Corey Harris
Garza and his companies owed investors a daily return that was larger than the actual return they were making on their limited mining operations because they sold far more computing power than they owned. [read post]
6 Jan 2012, 12:30 am by Kevin LaCroix
  According to the plaintiffs’ lawyers’ January 5, 2012 press release (here), the complaint alleges that the defendants concealed from investors that:   (a) the Company’s IT professionals were not a competitive advantage to the Company and many were dissatisfied with Camelot, which would adversely affect Camelot’s ability to retain its customers; (b) the Company was suffering from undisclosed attrition of employees, which was… [read post]
11 Jun 2012, 3:19 am by sally
Tyrolean Airways Tiroler Luftfahrt Gesellschaft mbH v Betriebsrat Bord der Tyrolean Airways Tiroler Luftfahrt Gesellschaft mbH (Case C-132/11); [2012] WLR (D) 173 “A provision in a collective agreement applicable to a group of companies within the airline industry which only took into account experience acquired as a cabin crew member from the date of recruitment by a specific airline company for the purposes of grading in the employment categories provided for in… [read post]
11 Jun 2012, 3:19 am by sally
Tyrolean Airways Tiroler Luftfahrt Gesellschaft mbH v Betriebsrat Bord der Tyrolean Airways Tiroler Luftfahrt Gesellschaft mbH (Case C-132/11); [2012] WLR (D) 173 “A provision in a collective agreement applicable to a group of companies within the airline industry which only took into account experience acquired as a cabin crew member from the date of recruitment by a specific airline company for the purposes of grading in the employment catagories provided for in… [read post]
Bankruptcy Basics for Renewable Energy Companies To expand your business, you could decide to: (a) license the use of your intellectual property, even your trademarks to a third party or (b) license the use of a third party’s intellectual property and its trademarks. [read post]
1 Jun 2021, 2:00 am by Doug Cornelius
Knight Nguyen Investments raised millions from its retail investor clients to invest in securities that met the firm’s investment criteria:  (a) always allocate “secured” capital to attract at least 10% returns, and would select entities (b) with taxable income to support returns and that often do over $10 million of revenue;  (c) that are already making money and not dependent on investor funds; and  (d) that have financials that have been… [read post]
7 Aug 2014, 5:03 pm
" The ALJ answered in the negative, holding that it would be contrary to the statute and case law to allow a purely revenue-driven licensing entity to avoid the requirements of subsections (A) and (B), by asserting a domestic industry under subsection (C). [read post]
22 Jul 2013, 4:29 am
Specsavers had more luck in the Court of Appeal though: it held the company entitled to prevent Asda from using the slogans ‘Be a real spec saver at Asda’ and ‘Spec savings at Asda’ as well as the logo used by Asda in its advertising campaign. [read post]
10 Mar 2017, 11:49 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Reifschneider, The Marconi Group: There are deals that have died just b/c of exhaustion uncertainty. [read post]
19 Nov 2020, 7:10 pm by Dennis Crouch
Assignment: Employee agrees that all right, title and interest in all inventions … that Employee conceives or hereafter may make or conceive … (a) with the use of Company’s time, materials, or facilities; or (b) resulting from or suggested by Employee’s work for Company; or (c) in any way connected to any subject matter within the existing or contemplated business of Company shall automatically be deemed to become the property of… [read post]
21 Jun 2017, 6:17 am by Michael Geist
This may embolden the CSE to engage in foreign government hacking, access information from domestic Internet companies, and disrupt communication activities. [read post]
9 Feb 2012, 6:56 am
The court also rejected as irrelevant the manufacturers’ arguments that the assignee was atypical of the class because it never purchased any vitamin C and because the company whose claim it was pursuing had been out of the vitamin C business for years.A company that purchased vitamin C from a wholly-owned subsidiary of one of the defendants rather than a defendant itself could not represent the direct-purchaser damages class, the court ruled. [read post]