Search for: "United States v. AT&T, Inc." Results 6941 - 6960 of 8,841
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Apr 2018, 1:17 pm by Silverberg Zalantis LLP
A lead agency ‘need not investigate every conceivable environmental problem’ during the course of SEQRA review (Matter of Save the Pine Bush, Inc. v Common Council of City of Albany, 13 NY3d 297, 307 [2009]), and ‘generalized community objections or speculative environmental consequences’ are not sufficient to establish a SEQRA violation (Matter of Village of Chestnut Ridge v Town of Ramapo, 99 AD3d 918, 925-926 [2012] [internal citations… [read post]
11 Mar 2016, 10:02 am by John Elwood
” He got the hint and filed an amicus brief expressing the views of the United States. [read post]
20 Mar 2009, 7:00 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Think Tank Global Week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com]   Highlights this week included: WIPO review of UDRP disputes - record number of complaints handled by WIPO in 2008 (WIPO) (Out-Law) (Michael Geist) (Managing Intellectual Property) (Class 46) (Intellectual Property Watch) (Law360) Goverment outlines new creative industries’ Digital Rights Agency proposed in Digital Britain report (Out-Law) (IP finance) (Intellectual… [read post]
14 Mar 2017, 11:54 am by Kevin Russell
Elite Logistics, Inc., in 2007, the 10th Circuit sat en banc to review discrimination claims by an employee who alleged that his employer suspended him from work until he produced documentation of his right to work in the United States, and then fired him after he produced the documentation and demanded an apology. [read post]
18 Jan 2021, 8:15 am by Steve Gottlieb
So there’s a need to state the obvious although it probably won’t get to the ears or minds of the people who ought to change their behavior. [read post]
17 Dec 2010, 3:34 am by Kelly
Town of Islip (Internet Cases) District Court Nevada unlocks allegedly infringing domain name STATION CASINOS based on ineffectual email service: Station Casinos, Inc. v. [read post]