Search for: "United States v. Horton"
Results 121 - 140
of 232
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jan 2013, 12:32 pm
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (Board) confirmed claims 1–14 of the ’680 patent. [read post]
14 Jan 2013, 6:06 am
The United States Courts of Appeals for the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 9th and 11th -- and now the 8th -- Circuits have all rejected employee challenges to agreements to arbitrate FLSA claims on an individual basis. [read post]
29 Dec 2012, 8:50 am
Meek-Horton v. [read post]
19 Oct 2012, 2:32 pm
’” She noted that the United States Supreme Court held in AT&T Mobility LLC v. [read post]
2 Oct 2012, 7:13 am
by Jeremy Clare The United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania denied a motion for reconsideration of the court’s order compelling arbitration because plaintiffs failed to establish a change in controlling law. [read post]
19 Sep 2012, 8:39 am
This decision applies only to those employees who work for private companies in the United States and have a right to organize a union. [read post]
10 Sep 2012, 8:22 am
United States v. [read post]
10 Sep 2012, 8:22 am
United States v. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 11:33 am
For example, the United States Supreme Court has held that illegal contract provisions are void. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 9:32 am
In Reyes v. [read post]
14 Aug 2012, 5:00 am
Horton. [read post]
13 Jul 2012, 9:33 pm
CAAF also granted review in United States v. [read post]
8 Jul 2012, 6:46 am
State v. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 7:27 am
§ 51–11–6; Horton v. [read post]
20 Jun 2012, 12:20 pm
After the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. [read post]
15 Jun 2012, 2:38 pm
The California Supreme Court will need to resolve these issues soon, regardless of whether the United States Supreme Court takes on any of these issues in the future. [read post]
13 Jun 2012, 6:41 am
CLS Transportation Los Angeles LLC, the appeal court affirmed an order to compel arbitration of wage-and-hour claims in light of the 2011 United States Supreme Court case AT&T Mobility LLC v. [read post]
7 Jun 2012, 1:41 pm
In April 2011, several years after the Court of Appeals had ordered the trial court to reconsider its prior order granting defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, the United States Supreme Court decided AT&T Mobility, LLC v Concepcion, which reiterated the rule that the principal purpose of the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) is to ensure that arbitration agreements are enforced according to their terms and held that “[r]equiring the… [read post]
7 Jun 2012, 1:41 pm
In April 2011, several years after the Court of Appeals had ordered the trial court to reconsider its prior order granting defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, the United States Supreme Court decided AT&T Mobility, LLC v Concepcion, which reiterated the rule that the principal purpose of the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) is to ensure that arbitration agreements are enforced according to their terms and held that “[r]equiring the… [read post]
7 Jun 2012, 1:19 pm
In April 2011, several years after the Court of Appeals had ordered the trial court to reconsider its prior order granting defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, the United States Supreme Court decided AT&T Mobility, LLC v Concepcion, which reiterated the rule that the principal purpose of the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) is to ensure that arbitration agreements are enforced according to their terms and held that “[r]equiring the… [read post]
