Search for: "W. D."
Results 6941 - 6960
of 13,767
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Jul 2013, 8:54 am
by Sharon D. [read post]
11 Jul 2013, 8:54 am
by Sharon D. [read post]
10 Jul 2013, 10:43 pm
Kaplan and Jon W. [read post]
10 Jul 2013, 2:47 pm
Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC, 20 W. [read post]
10 Jul 2013, 1:19 pm
The proposed amendmentsto Form D would require an issuer to include additional information about offerings conducted in reliance on Regulation D. [read post]
10 Jul 2013, 11:36 am
The Court of Appeals disagreed: “[W]e believe that there comes a point at which the degree of managerial responsibility becomes so substantial that the individual can no longer fairly be characterized as an employee similar to general wait staff within the meaning of Labor Law §196-d. [read post]
10 Jul 2013, 10:03 am
By Diane Kindermann, William W. [read post]
9 Jul 2013, 12:32 pm
W. [read post]
9 Jul 2013, 7:33 am
Mining Co., 2013 WL 888677 (D. [read post]
8 Jul 2013, 11:43 am
No. 08-520-GMS (D. [read post]
8 Jul 2013, 9:47 am
(Fed.Cir.1995)), nevertheless, “[w]hat is claimed by the patent application must be the same as what is disclosed in the specification; otherwise the patent should not issue. [read post]
8 Jul 2013, 6:22 am
Scott Distinguished Professor of Law, Horace W. [read post]
7 Jul 2013, 9:01 pm
Count the overnights. [read post]
5 Jul 2013, 5:54 pm
By John W. [read post]
5 Jul 2013, 8:58 am
The Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf (OLG) rightly interpreted Art. 34 EuGVVO (Regulation (EC) No 44/2001) narrowly and refused to consider this decision as being comparable to an award of punitive damages. [read post]
5 Jul 2013, 5:00 am
Supp. 2d 1143, 1149 (D. [read post]
4 Jul 2013, 5:00 am
And regardless what decisions we love or we hate, we can get up on our soap box (literal or cyber) and disclaim our reasons.That’s free speech.And free speech is one of the linchpins of preserving everything else that makes America what we hope America can be.So we thought we’d devote today’s post about an interesting free speech case, ONY Corp. v. [read post]
3 Jul 2013, 2:19 pm
Before concluding: [W]e reluctantly conclude Wife was not entitled to bring the South Carolina action for an equitable division, alimony, and attorney’s fees. [read post]
3 Jul 2013, 7:27 am
Michael Reisman, International Arbitration and Sovereignty 2002 - David D. [read post]
3 Jul 2013, 5:00 am
We don’t think so, and here’s where we’d recommend consulting with FDA administrative law experts for more details. [read post]
