Search for: "Matter of Ortiz"
Results 21 - 40
of 402
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 May 2023, 2:46 am
About 60,000 people are believed to be waiting to cross the southern border, Border Patrol Chief Raul Ortiz has said. [read post]
10 May 2023, 10:00 am
Discussing legal matters can complicate your case and may lead the SSA to question your motivations for applying for benefits. [read post]
7 May 2023, 1:44 pm
A judge's standing orders generally include various instructions to lawyers about procedural matters; here's an item from p. 4 of the 10-page standing orders from Judge Ana Reyes, newly appointed to the U.S. [read post]
10 Apr 2023, 8:45 am
Their position is “[Congress]… determined that definitions for musical works, dramatic works, choreographic works, and pantomimes were unnecessary because these terms ‘have fairly settled meanings’… As a general matter, a work that was created to be performed before an audience, directly or indirectly, is a work of the performing arts. [read post]
5 Apr 2023, 6:15 am
Windsor, 521 U.S. 591 (1997) and Ortiz v. [read post]
29 Jan 2023, 11:16 am
Ortiz (Cal. [read post]
23 Jan 2023, 5:00 pm
It would be physically impossible to copy the 5 billion images used to train the dataset into a 5GB file in a way that would allow the tool to spit out representations of those images, no matter how small you tried to compress them. [read post]
21 Nov 2022, 4:16 am
Jose Ramon Ortiz Monasterio DBA Jose Ramon, Opposition No. 91246728 (November 16, 2022) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Christopher Larkin).Contractual Estoppel: Applicant Ramon asserted the affirmative defense of contractual estoppel. [read post]
12 Oct 2022, 9:53 am
Why LIFO Matters Both LIFO and FIFO are grounded in the accounting principle of deducting costs when goods are sold rather than when they are acquired. [read post]
20 Sep 2022, 11:05 am
Similarly, a late answer may be considered in the discretion of the Commissioner if the respondent provides good reason for the delay (Appeal of a Student with a Disability, 57 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 17,275; Appeal of Ortiz, 47 id. 383, Decision No. 15,731). [read post]
20 Sep 2022, 11:05 am
Similarly, a late answer may be considered in the discretion of the Commissioner if the respondent provides good reason for the delay (Appeal of a Student with a Disability, 57 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 17,275; Appeal of Ortiz, 47 id. 383, Decision No. 15,731). [read post]
9 Sep 2022, 11:06 am
We highlight below the independent contractor misclassification and compliance developments that occurred in July and August 2022, but three deserve special mention. [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 9:05 pm
Petitioner failed to show by competent proof that ACS terminated his employment in bad faith, or for an improper or impermissible reason (see Matter of Che Lin Tsao v Kelly, 28 AD3d 320, 321 [1st Dept 2006]; see also Matter of Patterson v City of New York, 173 AD3d 540, 541 [1st Dept 2019], lv denied 35 NY3d 906 [2020]). [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 9:05 pm
Petitioner failed to show by competent proof that ACS terminated his employment in bad faith, or for an improper or impermissible reason (see Matter of Che Lin Tsao v Kelly, 28 AD3d 320, 321 [1st Dept 2006]; see also Matter of Patterson v City of New York, 173 AD3d 540, 541 [1st Dept 2019], lv denied 35 NY3d 906 [2020]). [read post]
17 Mar 2022, 4:18 am
Ortiz, 987 F.3d 635, 638–39 (7th Cir. 2021). [read post]
22 Feb 2022, 11:21 am
As a policy matter, I agree with Sotomayor. [read post]
31 Jan 2022, 12:39 pm
Photo by Ricardo Ortiz on Pexels.com A founder I’ve known for several years reached out recently. [read post]
18 Jan 2022, 6:00 am
The team’s capabilities include strategic counseling on all matters concerning the labor and employment laws and regulations, as well as individual and collective litigation. [read post]
8 Jan 2022, 4:30 pm
The Court found that the articles were written on matters of public interest and there was no proof that the descriptions in the article were untrue. [read post]
17 Dec 2021, 7:23 am
This case asks whether you can sue the medical provider for charging more than 75 cents.The case is Ortiz v. [read post]
