Search for: "State v. D. H."
Results 101 - 120
of 3,833
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Jan 2024, 10:01 am
Consulate in Monterrey to Obtain H-26 Visas were Not Compensable. [read post]
29 Dec 2023, 9:26 am
Cyrus D. [read post]
26 Dec 2023, 2:17 pm
Illinois v. [read post]
23 Dec 2023, 7:16 pm
Not only was the statement wrong in 1993, when the Supreme Court decided the famous Daubert case, it was wrong 20 years later, in 2013, when the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Diclegis, a combination of doxylamine succinate and pyridoxine hydrochloride, the essential ingredients in Bendectin, for sale in the United States, for pregnant women experiencing nausea and vomiting.[16] The return of Bendectin to the market, although under a different name,… [read post]
22 Dec 2023, 11:00 am
See Walsh v. [read post]
20 Dec 2023, 5:21 am
(Cohen, v. 2, p. 9.) [read post]
19 Dec 2023, 4:48 pm
The Departments establishment of the IDR fee for post-February 20, 2025 disputes and their previous December 15, 2023 announcement of the full reopening of the IDR portal for all dispute categories are part of the Departments’ ongoing response to the August 3, 2023 Federal District court ruling in Texas Medical Association, et al. v. [read post]
19 Dec 2023, 11:11 am
Mobil Oil Corp. v. [read post]
19 Dec 2023, 4:28 am
Cyrus D. [read post]
18 Dec 2023, 6:08 am
From Linthicum v. [read post]
13 Dec 2023, 9:05 pm
To test this, we classify U.S. states based on the percentage of voters who voted for the Republican or Democrat candidate in the 2016 presidential election. [read post]
12 Dec 2023, 7:43 am
Cyrus D. [read post]
11 Dec 2023, 9:05 pm
Kahn v. [read post]
11 Dec 2023, 7:56 am
Laufer on mootness grounds, Justice Jackson wrote separately to note her objection to the Court's established practice under United States v. [read post]
7 Dec 2023, 6:00 pm
The five judge Bench's decision of the Supreme Court of India in Cox & Kings v. [read post]
4 Dec 2023, 5:39 pm
In a unanimous decision, they ruled that “contrary to the BIA’s interpretation in Matter of Wang, the benefits of 8 U.S.C. section 1153(h)(3) unambiguously apply to all petitions described in section 1153(h)(2)…” While the government had not appealed the 5th Circuit’s decision in Khalid v. [read post]
30 Nov 2023, 6:41 am
Adolly.com, 2023 WL 5672170 (D. [read post]
30 Nov 2023, 6:05 am
” Kansas v. [read post]
27 Nov 2023, 6:30 am
” The policy language stated: d. [read post]
25 Nov 2023, 6:41 am
by Benton Bodamer (Ohio State Drug Policy Enforcement Center Report, 2023) Amicus Brief in SEC v. [read post]
