Search for: "MATTER OF K A B"
Results 2681 - 2700
of 2,720
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Mar 2007, 6:19 am
If you doubt me, ask yourself whether you still assume these firms are provincially limited to these cities: Foley & Lardner/Milwaukee; Jones Day/Cleveland; K&L Gates/Pittsburgh; Reed Smith/Pittsburgh. [read post]
19 Mar 2007, 5:13 am
Time for a break from the drone of SAB 108 adjustments… I’ll drone instead about the internal controls report in the General Motors 10-K filed last week. [read post]
18 Mar 2007, 10:34 am
At least seven states -- but not Kentucky -- have enacted laws allowing men to challenge paternity whenever deception is discovered, no matter the child's age, so that they no longer have to pay child support. [read post]
11 Mar 2007, 7:59 am
Signed March 9, 2007 -- Memorandum Opinion by Judge Deborah K. [read post]
6 Mar 2007, 12:27 am
(b) Although a federal court generally may not rule on the merits of a case without first determining that it has jurisdiction over the cause (subject-matter jurisdiction) and the parties (personal jurisdiction), see Steel Co. v. [read post]
5 Mar 2007, 9:59 am
Judge Sullivan's dissent begins: "I respectfully dissent with respect to that portion of Part I B which concerns valuation of the pension and 401(k) plans and with Part C insofar as it concerns the distribution of those assets. [read post]
1 Mar 2007, 11:38 am
`(b) Limitation on Prior Art-`(1) DERIVATION AND COMMON ASSIGNMENT EXCEPTIONS- Subject matter that would otherwise qualify as prior art only under subsection (a)(2) shall not be prior art to a claimed invention if--`(A) the subject matter was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor; or`(B) the subject matter and the claimed invention were, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, owned by the same… [read post]
28 Feb 2007, 6:54 am
If you work for a company that offers a 401(k) or 403(b) retirement plan and kicks in a matching contribution, you must join and contribute enough to get the match. [read post]
7 Feb 2007, 9:48 pm
Individualized issues that remain - no matter how extensive - are essentially ignored. [read post]
2 Feb 2007, 4:01 pm
" The "Investigators"Nifong: In a procedurally improper move, he assumed personal control of the case on March 24, eight days into matters. [read post]
1 Feb 2007, 11:37 am
`(b) Limitation on Prior Art-`(1) DERIVATION AND COMMON ASSIGNMENT EXCEPTIONS- Subject matter that would otherwise qualify as prior art only under subsection (a)(2) shall not be prior art to a claimed invention if--`(A) the subject matter was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor; or`(B) the subject matter and the claimed invention were, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, owned by the same… [read post]
31 Jan 2007, 4:26 am
Gilbertz and Michael K. [read post]
31 Jan 2007, 12:55 am
" See also Fed.R.Civ.P. 83(b). [read post]
27 Jan 2007, 6:38 am
Of course, if I were the one being asked, since I'm at the absolute 180° opposite end of the spectrum from our friend Mort Pierce, I would choose Answer B in a heartbeat. [read post]
25 Jan 2007, 10:18 am
LePore a/k/a Donald LePore v. [read post]
22 Jan 2007, 9:53 am
Kenneth Thien, Karen K. [read post]
19 Jan 2007, 10:34 am
B. [read post]
17 Jan 2007, 1:11 pm
P. 54(b).First, the court concludes that the non-diverse interveners did not divest the federal court of subject matter jurisdiction. [read post]
15 Jan 2007, 10:04 am
`(b) Limitation on Prior Art-`(1) DERIVATION AND COMMON ASSIGNMENT EXCEPTIONS- Subject matter that would otherwise qualify as prior art only under subsection (a)(2) shall not be prior art to a claimed invention if--`(A) the subject matter was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor; or`(B) the subject matter and the claimed invention were, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, owned by the same… [read post]
