Search for: "Circuit Check IncĀ " Results 1901 - 1920 of 2,144
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Aug 2009, 4:52 am
Cole Enters., Inc., 62 F.3d 775, 778-79 (6th Cir. 1995) (president and 50 percent owner of corporation was “employer” within FLSA where he ran business, issued checks, maintained records, determined employment practices and was involved in scheduling hours, payroll and hiring employees). [read post]
16 Aug 2009, 9:51 pm
An i 4 and i Last week the AmeriKat spent five minutes standing in front of a Sainsbury's self-check out trying to identify a green oblong vegetable in her hand. [read post]
14 Aug 2009, 11:21 am
(For all you could possibly need to know, plus a little more, check out David Dawsey’s blog at golf-patents.com.) [read post]
10 Aug 2009, 6:50 am
(IP Watchdog) PLI publishes 2009 Federal Circuit Yearbook (IP Watchdog)   US Patents – Decisions CAFC: Inequitable conduct defense requires that specific facts regarding circumstances and intent to deceive must be included in pleadings: Exergen Corp v Wal-Mart Stores, Inc (Inventive Step) (IP Watchdog) (Peter Zura's 271 Patent Blog) (Patent Docs) CAFC: McNeil dodges bullet on timing of appeal filing: In re McNeil (Patent Baristas) (Peter Zura's 271… [read post]
Cole Enters., Inc., 62 F. 3d 775, 778-79 (6th Cir. 1995), the court found the president and 50 percent owner of the corporation was an “employer” under the FLSA where he ran the business, issued checks, maintained records, determined employment practices and was involved in scheduling hours, payroll and hiring employees. [read post]
2 Aug 2009, 7:58 am
The fraudulent business must be treated as the business the company carried on, said the court, in the first instance, to benefit the company.In dissent, Lord Mance noted that the world has sufficient experience of Ponzi schemes operated by individuals owning "one man" companies for it to be questionable policy to relieve from all responsibility auditors negligently failing in their duty to check and report on such companies' activities.Lord Mance also reviewed US cases,… [read post]
14 Jul 2009, 9:09 pm
Supreme Court has not decided the present issue, the court cited Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Jul 2009, 10:51 am
Simon & Schuster, Inc., No. 07-16356 (9th Circuit June 19, 2009) Satterfield sued Simon & Schuster (and its mobile ad agency) for sending text messages to her cellphone without the requisite permission. [read post]
26 Jun 2009, 6:53 am
The 9th Circuit issued its opinion in Zango, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Jun 2009, 5:18 am
The Circuit Court did not find this to be a difficult case because, while the “catalyst rule” for evaluating attorney fee awards had been used in the Seventh Circuit prior to 2001, the Supreme Court rejected that rule in Buckhannon Board & Care Home, Inc. v. [read post]