Search for: "Doe 103"
Results 2141 - 2160
of 3,234
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Dec 2011, 6:37 am
Adam Liptak of the New York Times reports on Cooper, in which the Court is considering whether the phrase “actual damages” in the Privacy Act of 1974 can include emotional distress that does not give rise to monetary losses. [read post]
1 Dec 2011, 5:01 pm
In order to have the appeal fee reimbursed, the appellant has to convince the Board that the first instance proceedings were affected by a substantial procedural violation (unless R 103(b) applies, that is), but the existence of such a violation will not always make the reimbursement equitable within the meaning of R 103(a), as the present decision reminds us.Claim 1 of the Euro-PCT under consideration read (in English translation):A method for measuring the shape of a reflective… [read post]
1 Dec 2011, 12:11 pm
" What does the term "on" mean? [read post]
1 Dec 2011, 7:04 am
Camacho, 11-103; and Holder v. [read post]
29 Nov 2011, 9:52 pm
Huddleston, 748 S.W.2d at 103; see Tex. [read post]
29 Nov 2011, 6:05 am
However, very rarely does a creditor actually attend. [read post]
28 Nov 2011, 6:00 am
” There does not seem to be any enforcement hook to actually require the recipients of such letters comply with them. [read post]
28 Nov 2011, 1:59 am
Raw milk also does not kill or reduce foodborne viruses or parasites. [read post]
27 Nov 2011, 4:26 pm
Under the settlement, Picard agreed to reserve approximately $103 million to satisfy any potential future administrative decisions or judgments against the IRS or the Trustee that might be entered with respect to the Payments. [read post]
21 Nov 2011, 1:50 pm
, 115 PENN STATE LAW REVIEW 341 (2010)Marc Edelman, Does the NBA still have “market power? [read post]
21 Nov 2011, 12:04 pm
No. 1757, 40 B.C.L.R. 103, Mr. [read post]
21 Nov 2011, 1:25 am
It is advisable here to remember that arbitration does not take place in vacuum. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 5:52 pm
Does it make sense? [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 5:52 pm
Does it make sense? [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 4:00 pm
Section 103 The next section of SOPA, Section 103, isn’t any better. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 1:49 pm
It asserted that Proposition 103 requires the CDI to share that authority with consumer representatives. 4. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 1:34 pm
We agree with Byrne.Of some interest:In the context of an obviousness determination, for example, “a district court’s failure to make a correct finding on the level of skill constitutes reversible error” unless it does not affect the ultimate conclusion under § 103. [read post]
17 Nov 2011, 5:01 pm
It does not imply that the deciding body should be reproached in any way. [read post]
17 Nov 2011, 7:58 am
Writing in the New York Times, Einer Elhauge also argues that the Court should uphold the law, reasoning that the individual mandate “does not require Americans to subject themselves to health care. [read post]
17 Nov 2011, 1:41 am
Does the bill really do all that? [read post]
