Search for: "HARRIS V. MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD" Results 41 - 60 of 66
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Jan 2019, 2:48 pm by John Elwood
Harris Funeral Homes Inc v. [read post]
22 Jan 2016, 8:12 am by John Elwood
Lee, 15-446, presenting two questions about review of decisions rendered by the Patent and Trial Appeal Board; Microsoft Corp. v. [read post]
9 May 2018, 4:09 pm by Orin Kerr
Judge Pamela Harris penned the majority opinion, and Judge Wilkinson added a concurrence. [read post]
20 Jul 2023, 1:25 am by Robin E. Kobayashi
Unfortunately, acts of violence can occur in any industry; therefore, the Florida’s Workers’ Compensation system, which is a critical aspect of protecting employees in the aftermath of workplace violence by providing lost wages and medical benefits, must be flexible and responsive to the wide array of potential physical and mental injuries that may arise. [read post]
27 Dec 2019, 7:55 am
” This overbroad formulation is a far cry from the definition set forth by the Supreme Court in Davis v. [read post]
15 Aug 2019, 10:36 am by Jeffrey P. Gale, P.A.
The immunity limits injured workers to the remedies available under the workers’ compensation system. [read post]
28 Apr 2008, 11:00 am
: Art, access and the public domain after Bridgeman v Corel’ – 29 April, New York City: (creativecommons.org), (Public Knowledge) US: ACI ‘Paragraph IV disputes’ conference – 30 April – 1 May, New York City: (Orange Book Blog) Pharma & Biotech Pharma & Biotech - General Canada: Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (PMPRB) departs from its guidelines in determining price in recent decision:… [read post]
29 Dec 2009, 5:50 pm by admin
Click Here California Dairy Gives County a Gas Detection System, Settling Case. [read post]
14 Jan 2014, 9:48 am by Jay Yurkiw
Mar. 15, 2013) (noting that predictive coding is “an automated method that credible sources say has been demonstrated to result in more accurate searches at a fraction of the cost of human reviewers” and relying in part on its availability to reject a law firm’s undue burden objection to a subpoena served on it); Harris v. [read post]