Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Centor criteria are a set of criteria which may be used to identify the likelihood of a bacterial infection in patients complaining of a sore throat. They were developed as a method to quickly diagnose the presence of Group A streptococcal infection or diagnosis of streptococcal pharyngitis in "adult patients who presented to an urban emergency room complaining of a sore throat."
A culture positive case of streptococcal pharyngitis with typical tonsillar exudate in a 16-year-old: Specialty: Infectious disease: Symptoms: Fever, sore throat, enlarged lymph nodes [1] Usual onset: 1–3 days after exposure [2] [3] Duration: 7–10 days [2] [3] Causes: Group A streptococcus [1] Risk factors: Sharing drinks or eating utensils ...
In re Caremark International Inc. Derivative Litigation, 698 A.2d 959 (Del. Ch. 1996), [1] is a civil action that came before the Delaware Court of Chancery. It is an important case in United States corporate law and discusses a director's duty of care in the oversight context.
United States of America v. Islamic Republic of Iran [1980] ICJ 1 (also called the Case Concerning United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran) is a public international law case (issued in two decisions) brought to the International Court of Justice by the United States of America against Iran in response to the Iran hostage crisis, where United States diplomatic offices and ...
Semtek v. Lockheed Martin, 531 U.S. 497 (2001), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the claim preclusive effect of a federal judgment on a claim over which subject matter jurisdiction is based solely on diversity is determined by the common law of the state in which the federal district court rendering the decision is located.
Baker v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] 2 SCR 817 is a leading Canadian administrative law decision of the Supreme Court of Canada. The Court provided guidance on the standard of judicial review of administrative decisions. The issue was what standard of procedural fairness should be applied when considering the ...
A jury awarded International roughly $90 million for violations of the Lanham Act, an amount equal to what International asserted Abitron's profits amounted to. This was despite the fact that a vast majority of these profits occurred outside the United States, and a great majority of the involved products never reached the United States.
Mayo v. Prometheus, 566 U.S. 66 (2012), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that unanimously held that claims directed to a method of giving a drug to a patient, measuring metabolites of that drug, and with a known threshold for efficacy in mind, deciding whether to increase or decrease the dosage of the drug, were not patent-eligible subject matter.