Search for: "Edwards v. Arthur Andersen"
Results 81 - 99
of 99
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Aug 2010, 12:19 pm
Edwards v. [read post]
21 Sep 2023, 2:57 pm
Arthur Andersen LLP and void all employment noncompete agreements no matter how narrowly tailored. [read post]
3 Nov 2023, 7:11 am
Summary of AB 1076 First, AB 1076 codifies existing caselaw, Edwards v. [read post]
18 Dec 2020, 12:53 pm
”); Edwards v. [read post]
4 Apr 2012, 1:16 pm
Edwards, 437 F.3d 1145, 1152 (11th Cir.2006); Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. [read post]
8 Aug 2019, 10:00 am
” In 2008, the California Supreme Court, in Edwards v. [read post]
26 May 2009, 4:09 pm
Arthur Andersen (2008) 44 Cal.4th 937, 946 . . .? [read post]
12 Dec 2008, 6:21 am
[Cross-reference to Lemley and Pooley, California Restrictive Employment Covenants after Edwards discussing Edwards v. [read post]
21 Jun 2009, 10:00 pm
(IP Watchdog) (Chicago Intellectual Property Law Blog) (Managing Intellectual Property) (Intellectual Property Watch) (BLOG@IP::JUR) (IAM) (Public Knowledge) (Patent Baristas) (PatentBIOtech) (Patent Docs) USPTO news: E-Commerce alert – tips to improve your e-filing effectiveness (Patent Docs) IP protection in the US fashion industry (IP Osgoode) (IP Osgoode) US General – Decisions California Supreme Court reaffirms strong public policy against covenants not to compete:… [read post]
14 Jul 2011, 8:01 am
Arthur Andersen LLP, 44 Cal.4th 937, 81 Cal.Rptr.3d 282, 189 P.3d 285 (2008). [read post]
25 Sep 2008, 6:07 pm
(Stanford University)Alexis Marcus (Northwestern University)Alvarez Fernando (University of Chicago)Andersen Torben (Northwestern University)Baliga Sandeep (Northwestern University)Banerjee Abhijit V. [read post]
15 Jun 2020, 9:26 am
NuVasive, Inc. v. [read post]
18 May 2009, 5:24 am
’ (China Law Blog) Europe ECJ finds similar marks on wine and glasses not likely to cause confusion: Waterford Wedgewood plc v Assembled Investments (Proprietary) Ltd, OHIM (Class 46) (IPKat) AG Colomer opines in Maple leaf trade mark battle: joined cases American Clothing Associates SA v OHIM and OHIM v American Clothing Associates SA (IPKat) (Excess Copyright) CFI: Restitutio and time limits: how does the law stand now for CTMs? [read post]
One of the Stiffest Charges Against Jan. 6 Insurrectionists Hangs on by a Thread in the D.C. Circuit
11 Apr 2023, 5:01 am
Although the dissenting opinion cites Bond v. [read post]
14 Apr 2023, 4:00 pm
Parts of Sarbanes-Oxley beefed up penalties for people who destroy or conceal documents to keep them from federal investigators, the way Enron and its auditing firm, Arthur Andersen, did when Enron was under investigation. [read post]
16 Aug 2008, 2:43 am
– discussion of Washington Post article on Ismed’s efforts to promote follow-on biologics approval pathway: (Patent Baristas), (Patent Docs), US: Congressional fact-finding on follow-on biologics: (Patent Docs), US: David v Monsanto: Biotechnology patent ‘exhaustion’ after Quanta, Supreme Court petition: (Hal Wegner), US: Ulysses Pharmaceuticals announces issuance of patent for novel class of ant [read post]
18 Sep 2023, 5:06 pm
AB 1076: Void Employment Non-Compete Agreement AB 1076 seeks to codify Edwards v. [read post]
17 Oct 2023, 9:18 am
AB 1076 codifies Edwards v. [read post]
12 Apr 2023, 6:09 pm
Seyfarth Synopsis: When the Legislature reconvenes from Spring Break on April 10, 2023, it will resume consideration of the employment bills that were among the 2,600 introduced. [read post]
