Search for: "In Re Ms. X" Results 261 - 280 of 358
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Aug 2011, 1:08 pm
*Também serão julgadas os Mandados de Segurança (MS) 28594, 28666 e 28651 Recurso Extraordinário (RE) 572884 Relator: Min. [read post]
10 Jun 2011, 9:13 am by admin
    Oh, No, everyone should have a hundred chest X-rays a year! [read post]
29 May 2011, 6:49 pm by Will Aitchison
I know what you’re thinking: “This isn’t going to end well for the employer. [read post]
12 Apr 2011, 7:21 am by admin
  Page 25, Part X liabilities, includes this unexplained statement, “Due to related party, $3,723,246. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 5:10 am by Marie Louise
(Patent Law Practice Center) US Patents – Decisions CAFC refuses to require examiners to articulate a claim construction as part of the examination/rejection process: In re Jung (IPBiz) (Patently-O) District Court S D New York weighs in on constitutionality of false marking statute: Public Patent Foundation, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Mar 2011, 4:30 am
The likes of Amazon used to do quite nicely on this alone, using algorithms like "People like you who bought X also liked Y". [read post]
13 Mar 2011, 8:36 am by Aparna Chandra
Even if you think it would be good for people to do X, you cannot make it illegal for people to not do X, or everyone in the country who did not do X today would have to be arrested. [read post]
9 Feb 2011, 1:57 pm by admin
  In other words, the farm is worth four times as much in real terms as it was when Ms. [read post]
Zagat has one key rule: "At a business dinner, you're not trying to draw a lot of attention to yourself and what you're eating," she says. [read post]