Search for: "State v. C. S. S. B."
Results 2801 - 2820
of 15,321
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Apr 2008, 5:08 pm
(C) Hence, the Due Process Clause does not bar Shi's prosecution.But (C) does not follow from (A) and (B). [read post]
23 Mar 2023, 7:19 am
State v. [read post]
14 Sep 2023, 4:59 am
Opposer argued that the listing of its pending used-based applications for its STERLING marks on the ESTTA cover sheet satisfied the requirement of Trademark Rules 2.104(c) and 2.107(b) that the IB be notified of opposer's common law rights in these marks. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 6:11 pm
§18031],” §§36B(b)-(c). [read post]
29 Apr 2011, 1:19 pm
The Florida Senate’s adjourned with no effort to take up the bills that would split the state’s supreme court. [read post]
8 Sep 2023, 5:54 am
This is so because § 440.10(1)(b) makes B, C, and D “one and the same business or establishment. [read post]
11 Jun 2008, 5:35 pm
In Palmore v. [read post]
2 Oct 2017, 6:31 am
The decision is Joined Cases C‑24/16 and C‑25/16 Nintendo Co., Ltd v Big Ben Interactive (EU:C:2017:724, 27 September 2017).For those of you who don't know who have never had the pleasure of playing Mario Kart, Tetris or Zelda, Nintendo is a Japanese gaming company which creates both consoles and associated controllers (e.g. the Wii and Switch) and games (e.g. [read post]
15 Apr 2019, 2:06 pm
In Castro v Hernandez Renteria, 2018 WL 7680608 (D. [read post]
5 May 2014, 1:14 pm
Olivas, William B. [read post]
5 Mar 2023, 9:01 pm
Instead, each amount deducted or added pursuant to the pension value adjustments under Item 402(v)(2)(iii)(B)(1) or the equity award adjustments under Item 402(v)(2)(iii)(C)(1) must be disclosed in the footnote individually, to the extent applicable. [read post]
27 Sep 2014, 3:17 pm
The court also considered the three forms of preemption: a) express preemption; b) implied preemption; and c) operational conflict preemption, and granted summary judgment to the challengers of the ordinance. [read post]
12 May 2012, 7:36 pm
Evid. 702, Advisory Committee Notes to 2000 Amendments; see also United States v. [read post]
5 Sep 2014, 8:13 am
With the Court expected to hear oral arguments this fall in a pair of challenges to Alabama’s redistricting plan for its state legislature, C-SPAN Radio will air the 1993 oral arguments in another important redistricting case, Shaw v. [read post]
30 Oct 2008, 8:27 am
JEWELER'S BLOCK INSURANCE - BROKER'S CANCELLATION CLAUSE - PREMIUM FINANCE AGREEMENT - NEW YORK BANKING LAW § 576 - NON-COOPERATIOND&R Plaza Jewelry v. [read post]
15 Jan 2011, 5:00 am
Johnson, Donald C. [read post]
8 Apr 2016, 6:06 am
§1231(a)(1)(B). [read post]
8 Apr 2016, 6:06 am
§1231(a)(1)(B). [read post]
12 May 2018, 3:25 pm
Co. v. [read post]
20 Nov 2018, 11:06 pm
Main Request, Rule 111(2) EPC2.1 At the time when the contested decision was issued, the requirements for issuing a refusal using a standard form referring to previous communications were set out in the Guidelines for Examination in the EPO, November 2016, C-V, 15.2.According to the first paragraph of Guideline C-V, 15.2, in order to comply with the requirement that a decision be reasoned (Rule 111(2)), it is only possible to use this form of decision where the… [read post]
