Search for: "STATE v. SY"
Results 101 - 120
of 1,513
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jun 2023, 12:13 pm
From Silverman v. [read post]
21 Jun 2023, 12:01 pm
Sys. [read post]
3 Jun 2023, 3:43 pm
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in Mendoza v. [read post]
2 Jun 2023, 12:02 am
Budget Rent-A-Car Sys., Inc., 634 S.E.2d 324, 327 (Va. 2006). [read post]
24 May 2023, 3:55 pm
Welcome back to the Cost Corner, where we provide practical insight into the complex cost and pricing regulations that apply to Government contractors. [read post]
16 May 2023, 7:33 am
Monolithic Power Sys., 467 F.3d 1355, 1363 (Fed. [read post]
16 May 2023, 7:33 am
Monolithic Power Sys., 467 F.3d 1355, 1363 (Fed. [read post]
16 May 2023, 7:33 am
Monolithic Power Sys., 467 F.3d 1355, 1363 (Fed. [read post]
13 May 2023, 5:17 am
Health Sys. of Long Island Inc. [read post]
8 May 2023, 9:00 am
Cir. 2015) and SFA Sys., LLC v. [read post]
27 Apr 2023, 11:23 am
For services that are “of a type” offered and sold competitively in substantial quantities in the commercial marketplace, the contracting officer must determine that the offeror has submitted sufficient information to evaluate price reasonableness through price analysis.[38] For DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard, minor modifications to commercial products that do not change the commercial product to other than commercial are exempt from the requirement to submit certified cost or pricing… [read post]
13 Apr 2023, 7:11 am
" United States v. [read post]
6 Apr 2023, 11:00 pm
Sys., Inc. v Belessis [read post]
31 Mar 2023, 3:12 pm
Sys. [read post]
29 Mar 2023, 7:27 pm
Sys., Inc. v. [read post]
29 Mar 2023, 4:20 pm
In Clayton v. [read post]
29 Mar 2023, 3:24 am
Registration Sys., Inc. v McVicar, 203 AD3d 919 [2d Dept 2022]). [read post]
27 Mar 2023, 9:01 pm
Note, however, that this figure does not include class action suits filed in state court or state court derivative suits, including those in the Delaware Court of Chancery. [read post]
22 Mar 2023, 7:41 pm
Sys. [read post]
9 Mar 2023, 3:59 am
” That’s more than a little strange, and bear in mind that “[t]he Board, being thoroughly familiar with current case law, will apply the correct case law,” In re Active Ankle Sys., Inc., 83 U.S.P.Q.2d 1532, 1534 (T.T.A.B. 2007), and that before issuing a precedential decision such as Uman, “[t]he Board engages in thorough internal review,” DC Comics v. [read post]
