Search for: "Does 1-16"
Results 101 - 120
of 18,868
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Apr 2013, 8:27 am
Ishikawa, col. 1, ll. 13-17;col. 3, ll. 16-25, 32-48; col. 8, ll. 27-29; fig. 1. [read post]
7 Jan 2013, 7:22 am
Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 417 (2007).Although the appellants lost on claim 1, they prevailed on claim 2:We find no mention in the passages cited by the Examiner (col. 16, l. 10–col. 17, l. 5) of the distal end of the Campbell balloon being utilized as an orientation marker, and the Examiner does not cogently explain how these passages are relevant. [read post]
28 Feb 2023, 2:38 pm
J.A. 16–18. [read post]
19 Aug 2020, 4:15 am
What does this mean for issuers? [read post]
5 Sep 2017, 2:58 pm
Comments on the proposed rule are due October 16, 2017. [read post]
5 Sep 2017, 2:58 pm
Comments on the proposed rule are due October 16, 2017. [read post]
9 Sep 2016, 8:11 pm
G.G. 16-273 Issue: (1) Whether this Court should retain the Auer v. [read post]
13 Jan 2017, 8:10 pm
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 16-673 Issues: (1) Whether a federal official may retroactively ratify an ultra vires government action when: (a) no federal official was authorized to perform the act at the time it was initially undertaken; (b) the purported ratification does not include an examination of any facts related to the act performed; or (c) the ratification purports to encompass not only the initial act but also federal court rulings entered in… [read post]
28 Oct 2009, 4:44 pm
Does 1-16, the appeal from the lower court's rulings has been set down for argument in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, on Friday, November 20th, on the 2:00 P.M. calendar (pdf). [read post]
6 Oct 2016, 8:27 pm
Brohl 16-267 Issue: (1) Whether a state statute that imposes regulatory obligations that apply, as a matter of law, solely to out-of-state companies, but does not use “language explicitly identifying geographical distinctions” in its text, discriminates against interstate commerce; (2) whether the 10th Circuit erred in adopting a “comparative burdens” test for discrimination, under which the burden of regulatory requirements imposed solely on… [read post]
20 Dec 2013, 6:25 am
A reasonable interpretation of claims 16 and 36 consistent with Appellants’ Specification is that the claims recite no more than software per se which does not fall within one of the four categories of subject matter that are eligible for patent protection under § 101: (1) processes; (2) machines; (3) manufactures; and (4) compositions of matter. 35 U.S.C. [read post]
2 Jun 2012, 12:12 pm
Now what does it do? [read post]
17 Jul 2013, 1:46 pm
And as per the definition of "elector" under s.2(1)(e) of the 1951 Act, the relevant provision is s. 16 of the 1950 Act. [read post]
27 Feb 2015, 5:06 am
§ 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii). [read post]
26 Aug 2011, 2:12 am
Motion Picture Industry Pension & Health Plans 16 F.Supp.2d 1164 (C.D. [read post]
18 Jan 2018, 6:32 am
[16] Id. at *3. [read post]
24 Mar 2009, 12:22 pm
Does 1-16, targeting students at the State University of New York in Albany, a case in which an appeal has been filed and the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has issued an interim stay of the subpoena directed to SUNY Albany, the RIAA has filed papers opposing defendant's motion for a stay pending appeal.Plaintiffs' memorandum in opposition to motion for stay pending appeal*-->* Document published online at Internet Law &… [read post]
11 Jul 2012, 7:36 am
Does your company require executives to comply with HSR filing requirements upon acquiring company shares: - Yes, and they have been for a while - 39% - Yes, but only recently because of this enforcement action - 16% - No - 45% 2. [read post]
1 Apr 2014, 5:24 am
§ 16-15-902 does not explicitly state that a plaintiff must return the process if it is unserved. [read post]
9 Jun 2016, 3:28 pm
The post Does Rule 105-1 Need Revision to Prevent Improper Insider Trades? [read post]
