Search for: "Does 1-35"
Results 2581 - 2600
of 9,567
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Nov 2013, 7:58 am
Instead of 35%, those taxpayers will pay 39.6%. [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 2:00 am
Comments to the Proposed Order are due by July 1, 2011. [read post]
4 May 2019, 12:39 pm
Mar. 1, 2018, no pet.) [read post]
19 Nov 2009, 12:23 am
In a comment to the IPBiz post Does the US need European style oppositions? [read post]
22 Jun 2016, 6:39 am
Promega Corporation 14-1538Issue: (1) Whether the Federal Circuit erred in holding that a single entity can "actively induce" itself to infringe a patent under 35 U.S.C. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 1:27 pm
§ 1103-1(1) (2011)). [read post]
27 Jul 2015, 5:35 pm
If your street does not qualify, you may re-apply in 2 years. [read post]
13 Mar 2012, 2:59 am
Berman (CA-28), Robert Brady (PA-1), David Cicilline (RI-1), Yvette D. [read post]
1 Feb 2022, 12:32 am
Does the EPC confer jurisdiction on the EPO to determine whether a party validly claims to be a successor in title as referred to in Article 87(1)(b) EPC? [read post]
19 Oct 2010, 4:01 pm
Under N.J.S. 2C:35-5, it shall be unlawful for any person knowingly or purposely: (1) To manufacture, distribute or dispense, or to possess or have under his control with intent to manufacture, distribute or dispense, a controlled dangerous substance or controlled substance analog; or (2) To create, distribute, or possess or have under his control with intent to distribute, a counterfeit controlled dangerous substance. [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 1:38 pm
" 35 U.S.C. [read post]
30 Jul 2013, 2:12 pm
” The latter section didn’t apply in this case, and, crucially, Public Resources Code § 21080(b) sets forth a list of statutory exemptions and activities not subject to CEQA that does not encompass Government Code § 65457. [read post]
31 May 2017, 4:27 am
The Sentencing Commission does not account for Rule 35(b) reductions. [read post]
24 May 2013, 9:09 am
From the reasons McLachlin C.J. wrote for the Court. [1] The main question on this appeal is whether a trial judge’s decision should be set aside because his reasons for judgment incorporated large portions of the plaintiffs’ submissions. [read post]
20 Dec 2016, 10:00 pm
This request concerned the interpretation of Articles 1, 22(2), 34(1) and 35(1) of the Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (Brussels I Regulation). [read post]
17 Aug 2010, 3:01 pm
In the present case, however, the claimed amounts represent a continuum of a numerical range of values which does not correspond to distinctive alternative embodiments. [read post]
23 Jul 2017, 4:00 am
Bradshaw, 2017 SCC 35 (36537) Hearsay may exceptionally be admitted under the principled exception when it meets the criteria of necessity and threshold reliability. [read post]
19 May 2016, 6:24 pm
Enfish rejects that conclusion and instead held that that Step-1 is designed as a meaningful test. [read post]
4 Mar 2013, 7:16 am
Points of real divergence 1. [read post]
10 Oct 2019, 12:25 pm
The following examples have been abstracted from the Revenue Ruling:Example 1—Taxpayer holds units of the virtual currency Crypto M. [read post]
