Search for: "DOES 1-121" Results 41 - 60 of 1,213
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Mar 2008, 7:26 am
It therefore does not fall within the literal terms of [section 121]. [read post]
19 Mar 2024, 5:52 am by Tom Dannenbaum
In clarifying what it means to starve civilians as a method of warfare, it is critical to emphasize that the presence of combatants does not change the civilian character of a population that is predominantly composed of civilians (e.g. [read post]
17 Nov 2012, 11:01 am by oliver randl
However, the disclaimer of claim 1 does not exclude the polypeptides the sequence of which has at least 50% similarity with the sequence of 424 amino acids of figure 1 of document D1 or with any part of this sequence and which are capable of binding to IL-13 with low affinity. [read post]
6 Dec 2009, 6:44 am by malik11397
As this case presents an issue of first impression, our jurisdiction is pursuant to Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 1-2(b)(1). 1 Mortgage Electronic Registration System, Inc. [read post]
9 Jan 2013, 10:09 am by WSLL
§§ 1-39-101 to -121 (LexisNexis 2011), and that the trespass and ejectment claims failed as a matter of law because the Smiths no longer had sufficient possessory interest to make those claims.Issues: Does the statute of limitations found in the WGCA govern in inverse condemnation cases? [read post]
21 Nov 2014, 10:22 am by Tom Webley
L. 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 (1996)) “when a rule is expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. [read post]
25 Jul 2010, 10:44 am by Carter Ruml
Comm’r, 135 T.C. 1 (July 1, 2010), a very interesting income tax case that will have implications for private clients at all wealth levels. [read post]
7 Oct 2014, 8:23 am
These rights survive the author’s death for seventy years.Also, under article L.121-1 of the same code, authors have moral rights, that is, the right to respect for their name, authorship and work. [read post]
15 Jun 2010, 10:25 pm by Kevin Jon Heller
  Wouldn’t that agreement have been binding under the Vienna Convention despite Article 121(1)? [read post]