Search for: "State v. K. T."
Results 2561 - 2580
of 3,544
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Sep 2011, 7:00 am
In Railroad Commission Of Texas v. [read post]
19 Sep 2011, 5:00 am
In Material Yard Workers Local 1175 Benefit Funds v. [read post]
17 Sep 2011, 2:54 pm
Strickland v. [read post]
17 Sep 2011, 2:54 pm
Strickland v. [read post]
17 Sep 2011, 4:07 am
After considering evidence about a conversation that husband purportedly had with one of its employees, the Office of Personnel Management affirmed, stating that husband could have elected to receive a reduced lifetime annuity with survivor benefits for a new wife only by notifying OPM of his intentions in a signed writing within two years of his marriage, 5 U.S.C. 8339(k)(2)(A). [read post]
15 Sep 2011, 12:34 pm
(State of Arizona and Janice K. [read post]
15 Sep 2011, 4:06 am
Gaudio v. [read post]
14 Sep 2011, 6:08 am
(Part One) – http://tinyurl.com/3p8hbzp (eDiscovery Team) A Timely Warning to Employees About Social Media – http://tinyurl.com/3vjacww (Amanda Bronstad) Baglow v Smith – The Increasing Importance of Context in Defamation Claims - http://tinyurl.com/44pmecq (Bob Tarantino) Connecticut Courts Weigh In on Social Media as Evidence – http://tinyurl.com/3hgy34v (Marie Grady) D.C. [read post]
13 Sep 2011, 8:08 am
” (Snyder v. [read post]
12 Sep 2011, 3:35 am
(IPBiz) US Patents – Decisions CAFC reverses DNH in Markem-Imaje Corporation v Zipher; Newman partially dissents (IPBiz) District Court Nevada: Plaintiff need not produce licenses involving unasserted patents where licenses involving patents-in-suit have been produced: Bally Technologies, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Sep 2011, 7:09 am
David K. [read post]
9 Sep 2011, 5:21 am
Magistrate Judge Karen K. [read post]
6 Sep 2011, 9:41 am
(See, for example: Eysoldt v. [read post]
3 Sep 2011, 11:01 am
On the other hand, “a disclaimer should not remove more than is necessary […] to restore novelty […]” (see G 1/03 [headnote 2.2] and [3]).[5.5.1] The second paragraph of G 1/03 [3] states“However, the only justification for the disclaimer is to exclude a novelty-destroying disclosure […]. [read post]
1 Sep 2011, 5:01 pm
Reference was made by the EBA to decision T 1107/06 [31. et seq.], and the decisions cited therein. [read post]
31 Aug 2011, 7:42 am
(Alan S. v. [read post]
30 Aug 2011, 4:49 am
Intellectual Property And Biotechnology, edited by Arti K. [read post]
28 Aug 2011, 2:38 pm
"We'll see how smart you are when the K-9's come, I got 99 problems but a bitch ain't one".... [read post]
27 Aug 2011, 10:05 am
Near v. [read post]
26 Aug 2011, 7:36 am
Gordon v. [read post]
