Search for: "THE UNITED STATES et al"
Results 1861 - 1880
of 8,482
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Aug 2011, 2:24 pm
Secretary, Department of Corrections, et. al., Case No.: 6:07-cv-839-Orl-35-KRS. [read post]
19 Mar 2022, 4:52 am
Inivata, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 21-56-LPS (D.Del. [read post]
5 Jan 2012, 4:17 pm
Douglas, both experienced patent examiners at the United States Patent and Trademark Office. [read post]
3 Jul 2011, 10:22 pm
Justus et al v. [read post]
29 Jan 2018, 9:14 am
Joseph Matal, Interim Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office, et al., No. 17-214 Outdry Technologies Corporation v. [read post]
1 Mar 2018, 2:19 pm
United States of America v. [read post]
1 Mar 2018, 2:19 pm
United States of America v. [read post]
30 Jul 2011, 7:01 am
Hartford Lloyds Insurance Company, et al. [read post]
10 Jun 2019, 7:48 am
Hamilton County Hospital et al – United States District Court – Northern District of Iowa – June 7th, 2019) involves the termination of the plaintiff’s employment and the events that were leading up to and following the termination. [read post]
21 Aug 2018, 7:03 am
Louis County et al – United States District Court – Eastern District of Missouri – August 21st, 2018) involves a section 1983 claim stemming from the execution of a search warrant at the plaintiff’s home. [read post]
25 Oct 2016, 4:04 pm
Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs et al. [read post]
10 Mar 2011, 11:10 am
Attorney is available on the Internet at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/50454766/Kruger-Carl-et-al-Complaint. [read post]
23 Jan 2019, 10:08 am
Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al. [read post]
22 Jul 2013, 5:27 am
("Arthrex") infringed three of its patents: United States Patent Number 7,585,311 ("311 Patent"), United States Patent Number 8,100,942 ("942 Patent") and United States Patent Number 8,109,969 ("969 Patent"). [read post]
30 Sep 2015, 7:05 am
Solid, Inc. et al, 5-14-cv-03750 (CAND September 28, 2015, Order) (Grewal, M.J.) [read post]
4 Dec 2015, 9:50 am
Amphastar et al. [read post]
12 Dec 2018, 4:00 am
Taylor Law amended to clarify an employee organization's duty of fair representation of non-members in a collective bargaining unit Section 209-a.2 of the Civil Service LawIn Janus v American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, et al, 138 SCt 2448, the Supreme Court held that "States and public-sector unions may no longer extract agency fees from nonconsenting employees. [read post]
12 Dec 2018, 4:00 am
Taylor Law amended to clarify an employee organization's duty of fair representation of non-members in a collective bargaining unit Section 209-a.2 of the Civil Service LawIn Janus v American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, et al, 138 SCt 2448, the Supreme Court held that "States and public-sector unions may no longer extract agency fees from nonconsenting employees. [read post]
Special Master: Vincent J. Poppiti: Discovery Dispute over Production of Worldwide Sales Information
5 May 2010, 9:33 am
AU Optronics Corporation et al., C.A. [read post]
16 Jul 2012, 5:25 am
Mitchell McCormick, et al. v. [read post]