Search for: "JOHN DOES 4-6" Results 1801 - 1820 of 3,673
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Dec 2015, 6:44 pm by Bill Marler
  [1, 15, 33] CDC statistics show that food is the most common vehicle of transmission for noroviruses; of 232 outbreaks of norovirus between July 1997 and June 2000, 57% were foodborne, 16% were spread from person-to-person, and 3% were waterborne. [6, 31] When food is the vehicle of transmission, contamination occurs most often through a food handler improperly handling a food directly before it is eaten. [4, 9, 10] Infected individuals shed the virus in large numbers in… [read post]
3 Dec 2015, 12:25 pm by John Elwood
John Elwood reviews Monday’s relisted cases. [read post]
1 Dec 2015, 9:40 am
” (Revelation 17:4-6, 18 ESV)After all, could this language not fit the world-wide mercantilism of America today? [read post]
22 Nov 2015, 10:05 pm by Jeff Richardson
  Does it beat the 5.1 surround speakers that you might have in a dedicated TV room? [read post]
19 Nov 2015, 6:00 am by Administrator
John’s University School of LawNevada Law Journal, Vol. 15, No. 586, 2015 Excerpt: Opening anecdote, Introduction, and Section IV[Footnotes omitted. [read post]
12 Nov 2015, 11:30 am by John Elwood
John Elwood reviews Monday’s relisted cases. [read post]
9 Nov 2015, 3:45 am
 In other words, a Rule 12(b)(6) motion does not argue that a lawsuit is defective because there is some deficiency or other problem with the facts in the case. [read post]
6 Nov 2015, 6:42 am
 . . .Although Plaintiff launched an investigation to determine the identity of the hackers and the scope of the breach, it is still unaware of their identity and brought the instant action against the defendants as John Does 1–100. [read post]
2 Nov 2015, 1:51 am by INFORRM
The BBC has said it did not resist the police seizure of reporter Secunder Kermani’s laptop because the Terrorism Act 2000 does not allow it to mount a freedom of speech defence. [read post]
31 Oct 2015, 2:39 pm by David Cheifetz
to conclude: (1) the Court of Appeal of Newfoundland and Labrador would be aware, by now, of what the Supreme Court of Canada declared an aspect of Canadian law to be, in common law Canada, almost 6 about 8 years ago, or at least about 4 years ago, because about 4 years and certainly about 6 8 years is more than enough time for some medium to transport the information contained in the SCC’s statements from Ottawa to St. [read post]