Search for: "DOES 1-12"
Results 2861 - 2880
of 28,907
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Jan 2009, 8:18 am
The number of ill persons identified in each state is as follows: Alabama (1), Arizona (8), Arkansas (3), California (55), Colorado (9), Connecticut (6), Georgia (5), Hawaii (1), Idaho (10), Illinois (4), Indiana (3), Iowa (1), Kansas (2), Kentucky (3), Maine (3), Maryland (7), Massachusetts (39), Michigan (20), Minnesota (30), Missouri (8), Nebraska (1), New Hampshire (10), New Jersey (13), New York (12), Nevada (6), North Carolina (1), North… [read post]
28 Aug 2013, 10:58 am
The ordinance does not change lobbyist registration or reporting dates, but does add definitions, gift restrictions, and penalties for violations. [read post]
23 Jul 2015, 1:31 pm
Salmonella Paratyphi B variant L(+) tartrate(+) does not cause paratyphoid fever, enteric fever, or typhoid fever. [read post]
21 Oct 2013, 8:10 am
§ 10-3-1115(1)(a), by unreasonably delaying or denying a claim for benefits. [read post]
16 Sep 2013, 5:01 pm
However, in the present case, the provisions of R 126(1) to (3) apply. [read post]
30 Jan 2014, 9:30 am
All these imply that setting of levies must follow a two-step process:1. [read post]
1 Mar 2019, 10:42 am
The corporate defendants moved to dismiss claims asserted against them under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), arguing that the plaintiffs’ DTSA claims were not cognizable because the plaintiffs failed to allege misappropriation on or after the DTSA’s enactment date. [read post]
23 Jul 2013, 1:22 pm
As a result, the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider the petition and the Appeals Court also determined, ". . .we reverse and remand for dismissal of the Petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1)." [read post]
3 Feb 2014, 1:07 pm
Wood granted defendant The McGraw-Hill Companies’ motion to dismiss plaintiff David Young-Wolff’s copyright infringement claim under Rule 12(b)(6). [read post]
15 Dec 2014, 1:46 pm
At a hearing before the Senate Appropriations Committee November 12, representatives from DoD, HHS and the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) testified on the need for the funds and where they would be used. [read post]
10 Mar 2021, 9:23 am
There might be an "anomaly" in treatment of S. 8 petitions and S. 11 petitions insofar as appeal is concerned but that does not mean that an amendment has to be carried out. [read post]
31 May 2013, 1:22 pm
A promise is illusory if it does not bind the promisor, as when the promisor retains the option to discontinue performance. [read post]
12 Sep 2019, 10:38 am
(a), italics added.)Slip op, at 1-2. [read post]
28 Nov 2018, 12:53 am
In a word, IPKat does not know. [read post]
27 Feb 2023, 12:11 pm
The takeaway from this case is that an employer may not retaliate against an employee who inquires about a need for leave that might be FMLA protected, even if the employee does not expressly mention the FMLA or otherwise is even eligible to use FMLA leave. [read post]
14 Sep 2017, 1:05 pm
LEXIS 17666 ]:We hold that substantial evidence supports the jury's verdict regarding the validity of claim 41 of the '144 patent and claims 1, 10, 11, and 13 of the '462 patent, but conclude that substantial evidence does not support the jury's verdict of direct infringement of claim 41 of the '144 patent. [read post]
4 Dec 2019, 5:58 am
Evening Gaz. 12 Mar. 13/1 The rest of the chatter is so much malarkey, according to a tip so straight that it can be passed thru a peashooter without touching the sides.1938 Down Beat Mar. 5/4 We've got to say to the recording companies.. [read post]
30 Aug 2019, 3:29 am
," under Trademark Act Sections 1 and 45 on the ground that the specimen of use (below) does not show the mark depicted in the drawing, i.e., the drawing is not a substantially exact representation of the mark as shown on the specimen]. [read post]
22 Aug 2017, 6:43 pm
The Boarddetermined that claims 1–3, 8, 9, 12, 16, and 19 of U.S.Patent No. 7,626,349 (the “’349 Patent”) are invalid asanticipated or obvious. [read post]
6 Jul 2014, 1:04 pm
1-800-579-9864. [read post]
