Search for: "State v. K. T."
Results 2341 - 2360
of 3,544
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 May 2012, 5:52 am
Georgetown Law Rolls Out the ‘Law Firm Pronunciation Guide - bit.ly/KoaqON (Bruce Carton) Global Aerospace Inc. v. [read post]
1 May 2012, 6:49 pm
The stars seem to have aligned such that our state appellate courts as well the U.S. [read post]
1 May 2012, 5:01 pm
Therefore, it has to be established whether this use, which constitutes a method for treatment of the human body by surgery or therapy, confers novelty to the claimed subject-matter.[3.2] According to A 54(4), it is possible to acknowledge the novelty of a “… substance or composition, comprised in the state of the art, for use in a method referred to in A 53(c), provided that its use for any such method is not comprised in the state of the art” (emphasis… [read post]
1 May 2012, 2:08 pm
(AT&T Mobility LLC v. [read post]
30 Apr 2012, 6:40 pm
Marchello K. [read post]
30 Apr 2012, 4:11 pm
Andre and Scott K. [read post]
30 Apr 2012, 11:19 am
Martin K. [read post]
30 Apr 2012, 5:00 am
K-Mart Corp., 594 S.E.2d 1, 14 (N.C. 2004) (“plaintiffs do not have a vested prejudgment property right in punitive damages”); Evans v. [read post]
26 Apr 2012, 5:26 pm
Superior Court, (2005) 36 Cal.4th 148, which was overruled by the United States Supreme Court in AT&T v. [read post]
26 Apr 2012, 3:37 pm
Dep’t of Transp. v. [read post]
24 Apr 2012, 2:31 pm
RadLAX Gateway Hotel, LLC v. [read post]
24 Apr 2012, 5:37 am
In anticipation of the Supreme Court's hearing Florida v. [read post]
23 Apr 2012, 6:04 am
[James C.], 17 NY3d at 9; Nicholson v. [read post]
22 Apr 2012, 5:01 pm
Whether or not a member of the public has actually accessed the information is irrelevant (see T 84/83 [2.4.2]) . [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 2:09 pm
[New York Times] * Lat discusses blogging v. journalism, why you shouldn't be stupid, and the state of legal education with UVA School of Law. [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 1:41 pm
When the Supreme Court of the United States issued its landmark decision in AT&T Mobility v. [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 3:10 am
If you download thousands of lines of source code from your employer's computer system, you can't be convicted of theft under the National Stolen Property Act since the source code, being intangible, isn't "property" that is capable of being stolen: you can read the ruling of the Second Court of Appeal in USA v Sergei Aleynikov here. [read post]
17 Apr 2012, 5:01 pm
The board agrees and refers to T 258/03 [4.5 to 4.7]. [read post]
17 Apr 2012, 7:22 am
Philip K. [read post]
17 Apr 2012, 4:00 am
You don’t want to have to rely on equity (a/k/a, the court’s mercy) to avoid a bad result. [read post]
