Search for: "Parker v Federal Express, Inc" Results 61 - 78 of 78
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Apr 2010, 9:48 am by Bexis
”What’s expressed in §§201.57(c) and §201.80(e) are FDA standards, not common-law standards. [read post]
7 Apr 2010, 3:44 pm by admin
Environmental Protection Agency Region 5 has reached an agreement with Drug & Laboratory Disposal Inc., Plainwell, Mich., for alleged violations of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act requirements for hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal facilities. [read post]
15 May 2009, 7:49 am
  Relying on the Second Circuit’s earlier decision in Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Jan 2007, 8:40 am
Wyoming Department of Revenue Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. [read post]
12 Sep 2008, 2:33 pm
: Nine v IceTV: (International Law Office)   Benelux Some new rules of the Director-General of the Benelux Organisation for Intellectual Property with regard to trade mark filings refused on absolute grounds and withdrawal of oppositions: (Class 46)   Brazil Brazil exports agricultural technology to developing world: (IP tango)   Canada Conservatives website faces claims of copyright infringement: (Michael Geist), Canada’s trade mark opposition practice… [read post]
15 Dec 2020, 11:51 am by Bona Law PC
Brief of the United States and the Federal Trade Commission as Amici Curiae Supporting Plaintiffs-Appellee SmileDirectClub, LLC v. [read post]
1 May 2009, 3:48 am
Apr. 28, 2009)(Unpub)Affirming dismissal of Black fem's race-based training, discipline and termination claims5th CircuitØ Parker v. [read post]
18 Aug 2019, 8:18 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
The finding of the Parker Commission was overturned by the Federal Court in 2004 in Stevens v. [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 2:13 pm by admin
Jeffries Homes Housing Project, 306 Mich 638, 647-48; 11 NW2d 272 (1943); Grand Rapids Bd of Ed v Baczewski, 340 Mich 265, 270-71; 65 NW2d 810 (1954); Dep’t of Conservation v Connor, 316 Mich 565, 576-78; 25 NW2d 619 (1947). 9  See Chicago, Detroit, etc v Jacobs, 225 Mich 677; 196 NW 621 (1924); Michigan Air Line Ry v Barnes, 44 Mich 222; 6 NW 651 (1880); Toledo, etc R Co v Dunlap, 47 Mich 456; 11 NW 271 (1882); Detroit, etc R Co v. [read post]