Search for: "US v. Ryans" Results 21 - 40 of 2,220
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Mar 2024, 5:00 am by Vincent Joralemon
Again, this is because: (1) Ketamine is FDA-approved as an anesthetic; (2) Drugs with one approved indication can be prescribed off-label for other indications; and (3) The Ryan Haight Act allowed for Schedules II-V controlled substances to be prescribed over telehealth, without a prior in-person examination. [read post]
7 Mar 2024, 5:00 am by Vincent Joralemon
Again, they could do this because: Ketamine is FDA-approved as an anesthetic; Drugs with one approved indication can be prescribed off-label for other indications; and The Ryan Haight Act allowed for Schedules II-V controlled substances to be prescribed over telehealth, without a prior in-person examination. [read post]
6 Mar 2024, 9:03 pm by renholding
[5] Commission Guidance Regarding Disclosure Related to Climate Change, Release No. 33-9106 (Feb. 2, 2010) [75 FR 6290 (Feb. 8, 2010)] [6] See Basic Inc. v. [read post]
26 Feb 2024, 12:33 am by INFORRM
The ICO also published new guidance for all organisations considering using people’s biometric data. [read post]
21 Feb 2024, 9:45 am by Trent Dykes
The Governor has stated that she remains committed to enacting noncompete legislation protecting “middle-class and low-wage earners,” and Senator Sean Ryan, who sponsored SB S3100A, has indicated that noncompete legislation will be reintroduced this year. [read post]
16 Feb 2024, 4:27 am by Allan Blutstein
Before 2024 gets too far away, the legal eagles of FOIA Advisor -- Allan Blutstein (AB) and Ryan Mulvey (RM) -- look back at 2023 and discuss the decisions that stood out to them (in no particular order).(1) Am. [read post]
9 Feb 2024, 5:55 am by Tess Bridgeman
By Yousuf Syed Khan (@yousufsyedkhan) (October 17, 2023) Expert Guidance: Law of Armed Conflict in the Israel-Hamas WarBy Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw), Michael W. [read post]
6 Feb 2024, 3:36 pm by Marty Lederman
 Even apart from that fundamental flaw, however, this first “off-ramp” argument wouldn’t withstand scrutiny on its own terms, even if this were a case (again:  it’s not) where a state were purporting to “enforce” Section 3 by, for example, refusing to allow the winner of an election to enter into state office because she’s disqualified under Section 3, or using a state-law-sanctioned cause of action to remove such a person from the… [read post]