Search for: "Does 1-54" Results 2021 - 2040 of 3,413
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Sep 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
The Board does not see any reason for reaching a different conclusion because the introduction of the disclaimer into claim 1 and the addition of claim 8 comply with the requirements of A 123(2) and the decisions G 1/03 and G 2/10. [read post]
3 Sep 2013, 7:24 am by emagraken
  The “Legal Basis” section said in its entirety: 1. [read post]
3 Sep 2013, 4:00 am by Devlin Hartline
”9 Thus, we can break theft of movable property under the Model Penal Code into three elements: (1) unlawful taking or control, (2) of movable property of another, and (3) with intent to deprive. [read post]
27 Aug 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
Because of this lack of legal security claim 1 does not comply with the requirement of clarity pursuant to A 84. [read post]
27 Aug 2013, 7:25 am by Maya Angenot
The Motion was brought pursuant to article 54 of the Civil Code of Quebec, which provides : 54. [read post]
27 Aug 2013, 2:13 am by Florian Mueller
Actually, Google's primary concern would be the embarrassment resulting from this (and which would even result from a $1 nominal damages award). [read post]
22 Aug 2013, 10:41 am by Eric Alexander
  Here, plaintiff offered two alternative “designs”:  (1) replacing ibuprofen, a racemic mixture, with just the right-side stereoisomer, dexibuprofen—we are sure the pharmacology dorks reading this need no explanation of terms—and (2) replacing ibuprofen with a fairly well-known but quite different drug, acetaminophen. [read post]
20 Aug 2013, 12:54 pm by J
Interestingly (although not surprisingly), the ECHR does pretty badly in comparison to other jurisdictions; I want to do some more reading on the position under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights but, more practically, wonder if there is a way to use the jurisprudence from the Revised European Social Charter so as to bolster our arguments under the ECHR (something Dr Hohmann seems to think is possible, judging by her pg.50-54). [read post]
20 Aug 2013, 12:54 pm by J
Interestingly (although not surprisingly), the ECHR does pretty badly in comparison to other jurisdictions; I want to do some more reading on the position under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights but, more practically, wonder if there is a way to use the jurisprudence from the Revised European Social Charter so as to bolster our arguments under the ECHR (something Dr Hohmann seems to think is possible, judging by her pg.50-54). [read post]
17 Aug 2013, 3:56 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
P. 56(f) (“After giving noticeand a reasonable time to respond, the court may: (1) grantsummary judgment for a nonmovant; (2) grant the motionon grounds not raised by a party . . . [read post]
15 Aug 2013, 1:05 pm by Joel R. Brandes
Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(d)(1), costs "should be allowed to the prevailing party" unless the court provides otherwise. [read post]
15 Aug 2013, 8:10 am
(Pix (c) Larry Catá Backer 2013)In 2010, the faculty at Penn State Law approved the creation of a new concept course, to be named "Elements of Law". [read post]
13 Aug 2013, 9:30 am by Devlin Hartline
1 Deciding whether something is a privilege based on our own subjective view as to whether the thing is “honorable” strikes me as an imprecise and inconsistent way to classify things. [read post]
7 Aug 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
Claim 1 does not exclude the degradation (Abbau) of the proteins in a subsequent step because the claim is directed at a process comprising the steps (a), (b), and (c). [12] The argument of the [patent proprietor] according to which document D14 does not contain any reference to a clear solution is not persuasive either. [read post]
7 Aug 2013, 6:30 am by Joy Waltemath
In addition, he noted that a job that does not require English proficiency, and an employer that accommodates both Spanish and Vietnamese speakers, is attractive to speakers of those languages. [read post]