Search for: "In Re Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner, and Smith, Inc" Results 61 - 77 of 77
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Dec 2009, 6:55 am by Heather Young
Incorporated, Goldman Sachs & Co., Bear Stearns Companies, Inc., Bank of America Securities LLC, Bank of New York, Citigroup Inc., Credit Suisse (USA) Inc., Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc., Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., and UBS Financial Services, Inc. [read post]
26 Oct 2009, 1:37 am
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., supra, 68 Cal.App.4th at p. 459.)In re Baycol Cases I & II, 2009 Cal. [read post]
6 Aug 2009, 1:07 am
The Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) bears the burden of establishing that a proposed mark is generic, In re Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner, & Smith, Inc., 828 F.2d 1567, 1571 (Fed. [read post]
18 Jul 2009, 7:31 am
This post is by my colleagues Mark Schonfeld, John Sturc, Barry Goldsmith, Eric Creizman, Jennifer Colgan Halter, Akita St. [read post]
14 May 2008, 3:40 am
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 259 F.3d 154, 166 (3d Cir.2001) ("A class certification decision requires a thorough examination of the factual and legal allegations. [read post]
27 Feb 2008, 10:00 am
The Facts and the Theory     In the suit, Stoneridge Investment Partners, LLC ("petitioners"), alleged that Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., and Motorola, Inc. [read post]
1 Oct 2007, 5:45 am
The Supreme Court subsequently held that the district court erred in its conclusion that federal jurisdiction did not exist, see Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Aug 2007, 10:42 pm
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 259 F.3d 154, 164 (3d Cir. 2001) (citing "inordinate or hydraulic pressure on defendants to settle, avoiding the risk, however small, of potentially ruinous liability" as factor favoring interlocutory review). [read post]