Search for: "Application of State of California"
Results 921 - 940
of 18,165
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Jul 2020, 7:34 am
As our Orange County pregnancy discrimination lawyers can explain, both federal and state law provides protection for pregnant workers. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 6:50 pm
CASE: I-140 / National Interest Waiver CLIENT: Korean LOCATION: Santa Clara, California Our client contacted us in June 2013 about the possibility of doing a National Interest Waiver application for him. [read post]
12 Oct 2015, 6:28 pm
We also sent a request to the California State Government to get authentication for the necessary documents. [read post]
28 May 2021, 2:20 pm
A state court in California ruled that such a waiver is against California public policy and unenforceable. [read post]
17 Feb 2023, 11:16 am
By: Sage Fishelman and Josh Rodine Seyfarth Synopsis: A divided Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel has ruled that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts California Assembly Bill 51 (AB 51), which purports to prohibit employers from requiring job applicants and workers from signing arbitration pacts. [read post]
12 Apr 2024, 7:59 am
And second, California must first seek and obtain from EPA a “waiver” of the otherwise applicable federal air pollution limits for new motor vehicles. [read post]
21 Oct 2009, 12:54 pm
The State of California and the U.S. [read post]
13 Jun 2023, 9:29 am
Texas has a unique, three-prong applicability standard. [read post]
4 Feb 2019, 2:00 am
According to National Employment Law Project guidance on ban-the-box or “fair chance” policies and laws, published in April 2018, 11 states (California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington) have passed laws prohibiting private employers from asking questions about an applicant’s conviction history on a job application. [read post]
6 Sep 2022, 7:22 pm
As readers of this blog know, the State of California passed the groundbreaking California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (“CCPA”) which, among other measures, ensured that businesses protect the personal data of children under 16 years of age. [read post]
10 May 2010, 2:37 pm
Adam Ferber is the former Examinations Director for the State Bar of California and grader of 40 California Bar Examinations and First-Year Law Students’ Examinations. [read post]
24 Feb 2012, 9:30 am
The Attorney General predicts that this agreement will have international impact as app developers will choose to comply with California law and the agreement because California is an important state (lots of app users here), and it will be administratively easier for the app developers to have one design that works everywhere. [read post]
6 Mar 2008, 1:44 pm
California covets the line as a means to bring more power into the state, and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) approved the line. [read post]
7 Nov 2013, 10:23 am
The rule is easily stated; its application to the facts and circumstances of the individual case presents problems. [read post]
14 Oct 2021, 2:15 am
What products may THC be in according to California’s statute? [read post]
21 Nov 2019, 4:18 pm
In 2003, California was the first state to pass a law requiring commercial websites to post a privacy policy. [read post]
16 Feb 2023, 10:42 am
California may choose to petition for the case to be taken up by the Ninth Circuit en banc or could seek review from the United States Supreme Court. [read post]
7 Sep 2012, 6:30 pm
Finally, the court rejected the cardholder’s claim that the online application and advertisements violated the state’s Unfair Competition Law because the online application is protected by a federal safe harbor and the advertisements were not deceptive. [read post]
15 Nov 2021, 5:59 pm
In the agreement, it stated that the plaintiff and the property management company agreed to settle all “claims, disputes, and controversies” related to the plaintiff’s application for employment, employment, and cessation of employment with the company exclusively through final and binding arbitration. [read post]
28 Oct 2011, 2:00 am
The Defendants moved for summary judgment arguing: California’s UCL does not protect non-California residents from conduct occurring outside of California; Application of California’s statutes to non-California residents would violate due process; and California’s choice of law principles require the application of South Carolina law. [read post]
