Search for: "State v. Price"
Results 641 - 660
of 13,162
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 May 2023, 7:48 am
ExeGi Pharma, LLC v. [read post]
1 May 2023, 9:01 pm
The notice also states that taking unfair advantage of an opposing party (e.g., capitalising on a party’s lack of legal knowledge or representation), applying undue pressure or oppressive tactics, or preventing a party from keeping a copy of the NDA, would be a breach of a solicitor’s regulatory obligations. [read post]
29 Apr 2023, 7:13 am
Longarzo * DMCA’s Unhelpful 512(f) Preempts Helpful State Law Claims–Stevens v. [read post]
28 Apr 2023, 8:00 am
# # #DECISIONSouth Shore D'Lites LLC v First Class Prods. [read post]
28 Apr 2023, 6:30 am
Katz, Sabastian V. [read post]
28 Apr 2023, 6:30 am
Katz, Sabastian V. [read post]
27 Apr 2023, 11:23 am
For services that are “of a type” offered and sold competitively in substantial quantities in the commercial marketplace, the contracting officer must determine that the offeror has submitted sufficient information to evaluate price reasonableness through price analysis.[38] For DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard, minor modifications to commercial products that do not change the commercial product to other than commercial are exempt from the requirement to submit certified… [read post]
26 Apr 2023, 3:54 pm
United States Department of the Interior (Mineral Royalties; State Intervention) Alturas Indian Rancheria v. [read post]
26 Apr 2023, 12:58 pm
Schutte v. [read post]
25 Apr 2023, 1:39 pm
In other words, it would create significant red tape and compliance costs in an attempt to address an issue that is mostly peripheral to the stated aims, and arguably already dealt with by EU courts in Huawei v. [read post]
24 Apr 2023, 9:01 pm
”[15] Material interference may be proven through several methods, such as: (i) inference from an entity’s intent to interfere, (ii) evidence that the “natural consequence” of the act or omission is interference, or (iii) evidence that the act or omission in fact interfered with a consumer’s understanding.[16] Furthermore, “it may be reasonable to presume” material interference if certain “consequential” transaction terms, such as… [read post]
24 Apr 2023, 6:41 am
With the 30th anniversary of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA) on the horizon, the Third Circuit’s recent precedential opinion in Scott v. [read post]
24 Apr 2023, 6:41 am
With the 30th anniversary of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA) on the horizon, the Third Circuit’s recent precedential opinion in Scott v. [read post]
24 Apr 2023, 6:41 am
With the 30th anniversary of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA) on the horizon, the Third Circuit’s recent precedential opinion in Scott v. [read post]
23 Apr 2023, 9:01 pm
We are seeking to harmonize the minimum price increment where stocks can be quoted and transacted as well as lower these minimum increments across the markets.[14] Lastly, we put out a proposal to bring greater competition for a segment of the market related to individual investors’ marketable orders.[15] Private Funds Private fund advisers and the funds they manage play an increasingly important role in our capital markets. [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 9:05 pm
Such quarterly disclosures state whether the issuer’s relevant officers or directors have traded in securities subject to the issuer’s buyback program within 10 business days before or after its announcement.[8] Shortcomings of the SEC’s Reforms The key shortcoming of the SEC reforms are the absence of prospective disclosure requirements with respect to the adoption of Rule 10b5-1 Trading Arrangements and other trading arrangements despite its stated purpose of… [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 1:51 pm
And there’s only a single paper looking at downstream price effects in goods and services markets—one that doesn’t appear to be at all generalizable. [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 1:01 am
Howell v. [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 12:28 am
Wilkinson is Microsoft's renewed motion to dismiss: DeMartini et al. v. [read post]
19 Apr 2023, 12:45 am
But if a court can determine that an offer is not FRAND, it presumably could also state wh [read post]
