Search for: "Energy Future Holdings Corp. v."
Results 161 - 180
of 215
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jul 2010, 7:59 pm
Brown and David Matusow, Bahr, et al. v. [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 3:37 pm
The government came back to court, though, when it said Jupiter wasn’t holding up its end of the bargain. [read post]
2 Aug 2008, 12:54 am
: (Holman’s Biotech IP Blog), Daiichi’s open offer for 20% in Ranbaxy awaits Sebi nod: (GenericsWeb), Australia/India: Strides shows thumbs up for Indian generic industry acquiring controlling interest in Ascent: (Spicy IP), Europe: Significant date ahead for EU Paediatric Regulation: (SPC Blog), India: Grave diggers, ‘immoral’ patent and the National Biotech Regulatory Authority: (Spicy IP), UK: Monster trade mark infringement case: court reveals its thinking… [read post]
13 Sep 2010, 8:43 am
But his administration’s decision on this case, Connecticut v. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 4:14 am
As discussed here, in Public Employees’ Retirement System of Mississippi, v. [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 2:49 pm
Bilski et al v. [read post]
16 Apr 2011, 4:56 pm
(now part of Duke Energy), Southern Company, and Xcel Energy Inc. [read post]
3 Dec 2020, 3:00 am
Sacramento v. [read post]
7 Apr 2021, 8:14 am
Mar. 30, 2021) includes an unusually clear and concise explanation of tester standing that correctly applies the Supreme Court’s holding in Havens Realty Corp. [read post]
31 Jan 2013, 7:46 am
Moreover, the harm is usually potential future harm, and the Board often grants applicants the benefit of the doubt if they can make a basic showing. [read post]
23 Jul 2013, 7:07 am
This assignment includes, without limitation, all worldwide copyrights in and to the image, and the right to sue for past and future infringement.15 The district court held that the “TOU constitutes credible evidence that MRIS’s users intended to assign their copyrights to MRIS through the electronic submissions of photographs, which would satisfy the relevant provisions of ESIGN. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 9:54 am
Click Here US District Court Decision in US v. [read post]
7 Apr 2010, 3:44 pm
The following is a summary review of articles from all over the nation concerning environmental law settlements, decisions, regulatory actions and lawsuits filed during the past week. [read post]
17 Nov 2006, 11:59 am
Accordingly, he does not pass on the validity of precedent arguably holding that there can be a violation even absent a union demand for bargaining. [read post]
25 May 2022, 9:01 pm
Compare In re NVIDIA Corp. [read post]
27 Aug 2011, 4:34 am
http://j.st/Swn Amador v. [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 7:42 am
DECISIONS Sackett v. [read post]
26 May 2022, 4:16 am
Europe’s scramble to wean itself off Russian energy following the country’s attack on Ukraine will lead to new short-term investments in coal, oil and natural gas, energy and government officials said. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 10:04 am
Click Here US District Court Decision in US v. [read post]
3 May 2010, 9:30 pm
– Michael Aubele, Valley News Dispatch, April 27, 2010 The federal Environmental Protection Agency and Allegheny County Health Department want a federal judge to sign off on an agreement with Allegheny Ludlum Corp. and Harsco Corp. intended to control slag dust at the Ludlum steel mill in Natrona. [read post]
