Search for: "Does 1 - 29" Results 8501 - 8520 of 13,860
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Aug 2013, 2:52 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Nov. 29, 2012) (“November Order”) (collectively “Unsealing Orders”). [read post]
23 Aug 2013, 11:19 am by Jason Rantanen
  Claim 1 of the '494 patent: 1. [read post]
22 Aug 2013, 4:00 am by Administrator
It is important to ensure the technical meaning does not override the need to restrain the meaning within a legal context. [read post]
21 Aug 2013, 6:52 pm by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer
Employers may deliver the Exchange Notice by first-class mail or, if the electronic notification requirements of the Department of Labor’s electronic disclosure safe harbor at 29 CFR 2520.104b-1(c) are met, electronically. [read post]
21 Aug 2013, 7:00 am by Carolyn Walker
  For details on other Stoel Rives seminars and breakfast briefings, click here.)Situation No. 1. [read post]
21 Aug 2013, 4:30 am by Steve McConnell
March 29, 2013), was issued some months back, but we found it on LEXIS only a couple of days ago. [read post]
20 Aug 2013, 9:27 am by Wage & Hour Blogger
  As long as the public agency establishes a work period between seven and 28 consecutive days, it does not need to pay overtime until an employee satisfies the maximum hours standard set out in the Code of Federal Regulations (29 CFR Section 553.230). [read post]
19 Aug 2013, 5:00 am by Epstein Becker Green
Supreme Court ruled that an activity is “integral and indispensable” if it is (1) “necessary to the principal work performed” and (2) “done for the benefit of the employer. [read post]
15 Aug 2013, 8:10 am
(Pix (c) Larry Catá Backer 2013)In 2010, the faculty at Penn State Law approved the creation of a new concept course, to be named "Elements of Law". [read post]
15 Aug 2013, 4:46 am by Irina Moutaye
The Conference is being hosted by the ANU College of Law at The Australian National University, Canberra. 29 September 2013 - 1 October 2013. [read post]
13 Aug 2013, 9:30 am by Devlin Hartline
1 Deciding whether something is a privilege based on our own subjective view as to whether the thing is “honorable” strikes me as an imprecise and inconsistent way to classify things. [read post]