Search for: "In re N.C" Results 221 - 240 of 1,076
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Jun 2008, 10:31 pm
"We're saying it adds to the complexity of finding a place for them to live. [read post]
21 Sep 2007, 5:45 am
"If we're going to have the death penalty, (these rulings require) that wedo it the right way. [read post]
28 Nov 2006, 10:11 pm
" Who could stand up (or even squat) and proclaim that they're for an "unhealthy banking environment"? [read post]
31 Mar 2017, 11:11 am by Adeline Rolnick
WHAT WE’RE READING THIS WEEK In a recent op-ed, the Editorial Board of The New York Times criticized a series of moves by the Trump Administration to dissemble climate change initiatives made by the Obama Administration, including President Trump’s speech in Detroit pledging to restore a mid-term review process for fuel efficiency standards, a budget proposal that includes significant cuts to the U.S. [read post]
30 Mar 2017, 9:30 pm by Justin S. Daniel
WHAT WE’RE READING THIS WEEK In a recent op-ed, the Editorial Board of The New York Times criticized a series of moves by the Trump Administration to dissemble climate change initiatives made by the Obama Administration, including President Trump’s speech in Detroit pledging to restore a mid-term review process for fuel efficiency standards, a budget proposal that includes significant cuts to the U.S. [read post]
5 Feb 2013, 6:52 am by Matthew C. Bouchard, Esq.
Just as importantly to architects and engineers in North Carolina, the COA found that the definition of “Improve” under N.C. [read post]
2 May 2023, 6:10 am by Phil Dixon
App. 452 (1991) (loudly talking in class after being told to stop, causing a disruption of teaching, was not a substantial disruption)   In re: Brown, 150 N.C. [read post]
12 Aug 2022, 4:02 am
In re Zuma Array Limited, 2020 USPQ2d 736 (TTAB 2022) [precedential] (Opinion by Judge Christopher Larkin). [read post]
15 May 2019, 11:25 am by Joe Mullin
They’re pushing a false narrative about the need to resolve “uncertainty” in the patent law. [read post]