Search for: "Doe v. Holder"
Results 141 - 160
of 6,679
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Dec 2023, 1:30 pm
In Beck v. [read post]
8 Dec 2023, 8:07 am
Additional Resources: Emerson v. [read post]
7 Dec 2023, 1:47 pm
Lundbeck A/S v. [read post]
7 Dec 2023, 1:26 pm
See Vans, Inc. v. [read post]
7 Dec 2023, 5:23 am
Trendily Furniture, LLC v. [read post]
6 Dec 2023, 2:35 am
Jurisdiction Summary of regulatory regime relating to D&I in financial services Norton Rose Fulbright regulatory contact Asia China China does not have an overarching legislation or regulatory framework governing D&I. [read post]
5 Dec 2023, 9:05 pm
., LLC v. [read post]
4 Dec 2023, 1:33 pm
by Dennis Crouch VLSI Technology LLC v. [read post]
4 Dec 2023, 9:10 am
Instead, the sole ability of the sign to individualise the goods of the IR holder in relation to those offered by its competitors is decisive. [read post]
4 Dec 2023, 5:49 am
Co. v. [read post]
30 Nov 2023, 9:01 pm
Item 402(v)(2)(iv) does not contemplate the use of a broad-based equity index as a peer group for purposes of the pay versus performance disclosure. [read post]
30 Nov 2023, 7:38 am
That was a threshold condition, and not question of discretion, R (Omar) -v- Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2014] QB 112 [30]. [read post]
29 Nov 2023, 1:08 pm
” City of Troy v. [read post]
28 Nov 2023, 3:15 am
If retirement eligibility was the onlysole vesting condition, would this condition be considered satisfied for purposes of the Item 402(v) of Regulation S-K disclosures and calculation of executive compensation actually paid in the year that the holder becomes retirement eligible? [read post]
27 Nov 2023, 2:08 am
For example, in Rosalba Alassini v. [read post]
24 Nov 2023, 7:38 am
In this post, Pippa Borton, Associate at CMS, previews the decision awaited from the Supreme Court in Kireeva v Bedzhamov. [read post]
22 Nov 2023, 3:41 am
For example, in Amgen v. [read post]
21 Nov 2023, 10:20 am
CommentThis decision highlights the importance of carefully ensuring that all formalities for the transfer of an EUTM under Article 20 EUTMR are fulfilled, as it does not necessarily follow that the EUIPO will infer that a transfer is justified based on any party's legal entitlement to a mark. [read post]
21 Nov 2023, 7:20 am
See SpaceX v. [read post]
21 Nov 2023, 4:00 am
[v] Both Canada[vi] and New Zealand[vii] quickly claimed victory. [read post]
