Search for: "CREWS V US" Results 241 - 260 of 1,403
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Apr 2020, 12:03 pm by Overhauser Law Offices, LLC
Number Word Mark 1 6018989 SYNCAGE EVOLUTION 2 6018774 EXCAVATOR 3 6018440 THREEFOLD 4 6018439 THREEFOLD 5 6018438 THREEFOLD 6 6018411 THREEFOLD 7 6018289 AUTOBIOCOMEDY 8 6018261 T-PAL 9 6018178 KITCHIO 10 6018176 KITCHIO 11 6018014 DMI 12 6017908 HERMANAS HARMONY SPA 13 6017877 SHALOM HEALTH CARE CENTER 14 6017785 NIAAA 15 6017775 S SOUTHSHORE MANAGED IT GROUP 16 6017686 THE UNBRAND METHOD 17 6017240 V 18 6017126 PET PRIME 19 6017095 M 20 6020491 BLK HSTRY 21 6016952 CENTER FOR… [read post]
31 Mar 2020, 7:58 am by scottgaille
One of the tools used by energy companies in conflict zones is the Suspension Agreement. [read post]
26 Mar 2020, 1:42 am by Florence Campbell Jones
Therefore, the risk of not being able to use the aircraft for a certain period is effectively assumed by the lessee at the point of entering into the contract. [read post]
24 Mar 2020, 12:51 am by steve cornforth blog
Unfortunately, there is insufficient capacity in the court to use the installed video link widely, and this must be reserved for the most urgent of cases. [read post]
13 Mar 2020, 2:20 am by Sara Moran
In its judgment, the Court considered in detail the law on public prior use, in particular whether separate instances of experimentation could be put together via mosaicing and (obiter) what amounts to a public prior use. [read post]
5 Feb 2020, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
§243(1)(b) of the Military Law provides, in relevant part, that military duty includes "service in the merchant marine which shall consist of service as an officer or member of the crew on or in connection with a vessel . . . owned by, chartered to, or operated by or for the account or use of the government of the United States . . . and who served satisfactorily as a crew member during the period of armed conflict [December 17, 1941]to August 15, 1945] aboard… [read post]
31 Jan 2020, 6:09 am by Eric S. Solotoff
Aside from the tax issue addressed herein (and people used to say 1/3 for the husband, 1/3 for the wife and 1/3 for the government – though the numbers never actually worked that way), what is the justification for giving the income earner more than the recipient in light of Crews v. [read post]
21 Jan 2020, 3:43 am by Edith Roberts
” In a new episode of Strict Scrutiny (podcast), [t]he full crew recaps two arguments from the January sitting (Kelly v. [read post]