Search for: "DOES 1-11"
Results 101 - 120
of 26,654
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Jul 2013, 8:50 am
This case considered whether judicial participation in plea negotiation, in violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1), automatically requires the vacating of a subsequent guilty plea--regardless of whether the violation prejudiced the defendant.By a vote of 9-0 the Court held, per an opinion by Justice Ginsburg, judicial participation in violation of Rule 11(c)(1) does not require that a defendant’s guilty plea be vacated if the… [read post]
9 May 2012, 3:08 pm
The Indianapolis Star has a story this afternoon on the ACLU suit challenging IC 31-11-6-1, which the ILB wrote about... [read post]
9 Sep 2023, 11:36 am
Obtaining a visa from a U.S. embassy or consulate can be a lengthy process due to several reasons: 1. [read post]
27 Nov 2013, 5:01 pm
The [applicant] enclosed a certified copy of this document which contained 11 drawing sheets numbered 1/11 to 11/11 comprising Figures 1 to 11 respectively. [read post]
2 May 2014, 7:25 am
—Chapter 11 of title 35, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end of Section 112(f) the following: An element expressed as a function that does not comply with this subsection shall be in considered to be in violation of subsection (b). [read post]
16 Jan 2013, 7:01 am
Hydrapak, Inc., 1-11-cv-05379 (NYSD January 11, 2013, Order) (Cott, M.J.). [read post]
26 Jun 2014, 7:12 am
Google Inc., 1-11-cv-00318 (DED June 24, 2014, Order) (Stark, J.) [read post]
13 Jan 2014, 6:30 am
We agree with the court that Gant does not apply retroactively to the petitioner’s habeas trial, and affirm the summary judgment") Published: 1/13/2014 11:36 AM [read post]
11 Apr 2012, 3:31 am
Does 1-55, No. 11 C 2798, Slip Op. [read post]
19 Apr 2008, 5:34 am
Does 1-14, the University of Arizona has responded to the RIAA's subpoena, but its response describes in detail why the subpoena response cannot be relied upon to identify any alleged infringer. [read post]
16 Aug 2007, 2:35 pm
Claim 1 reads:1. [read post]
13 May 2016, 1:00 pm
Dart Container Corporation of California (Cal.App. 1/14/16) (discussed here), the California Court of Appeal held: (1) California law does not provide a method of calculating overtime rates of pay where the employer pays its employees an hourly rate of pay, plus a flat sum daily attendance bonus; (2) the employer here properly followed the formula set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations for paying overtime.The Supreme Court granted review on May 11. [read post]
13 May 2016, 1:00 pm
Dart Container Corporation of California (Cal.App. 1/14/16) (discussed here), the California Court of Appeal held: (1) California law does not provide a method of calculating overtime rates of pay where the employer pays its employees an hourly rate of pay, plus a flat sum daily attendance bonus; (2) the employer here properly followed the formula set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations for paying overtime.The Supreme Court granted review on May 11. [read post]
15 Dec 2015, 7:14 am
Accord Healthcare, Inc. et al, 1-14-cv-00389 (INSD December 11, 2015, Order) (Baker, M.J.) [read post]
13 Jun 2013, 3:53 pm
” Thus the Rule 11(c)(1) violation was clear. [read post]
7 Oct 2013, 6:02 am
., 935 F.2d at 1563-64.Appellant points to various portions of the Specification as providing support for the subject recitations in claims 1, 11, and 20 (App. [read post]
20 May 2009, 5:57 am
") Published: 5/20/2009 11:45 AM [read post]
4 Feb 2020, 4:15 am
On January 30, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeals Board’s (PTAB) decision rendering claims 1-11 of U.S. [read post]
20 Oct 2011, 9:40 am
DCF will reject Medicaid planning involving trusts and personal service contracts where a power of attorney is executed after 10/1/11 and the DPOA does not specifically authorize the ability to execute trusts or personal services contracts. [read post]
