Search for: "SUPPORT OF K F" Results 301 - 320 of 2,053
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Feb 2017, 2:25 pm
His wages were garnished three times to pay child support for children that were not his. [read post]
31 May 2012, 9:00 pm by Louis M. Solomon
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP, 256 F.3d 548 (7th Cir. 2001), which, the dissent says, did in fact permit the defendant to name another jurisdiction and thereby preclude application of Rule 4(k)(2) finding. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 9:20 am by Jeffrey May
The appellate court had upheld dismissal ((CCH) 2011-1 Trade Cases ¶77,508, 793 F. [read post]
22 Aug 2007, 9:29 am
Matt Johnston at Going to the MatDavid Giacalone at f/k/aColin Samuels at Infamy or Praiseand Todd Smith, at Texas Appellate Law Blog, who is hosting next week's Blawg Review #123.Many thanks to everyone who supports Blawg Review by hosting, sending in recommendations and submissions, and pointing your readers to the current issue with a link and your comments. [read post]
23 Dec 2016, 2:05 pm
His wages were garnished three times to pay child support for children that were not his. [read post]
24 May 2016, 5:56 pm
[Today's guest post is from Robert K S, who is a patent attorney from Cleveland, Ohio.]Takeaway: The 35 U.S.C. [read post]
3 Mar 2019, 9:05 pm by Samuel Becher
Instead of the recommended F-K score of eighth grade, the average F-K score in our sample was 12.78 and the median F-K score was 13—or one year of college. [read post]
6 Feb 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
Rather, the equity approach as taken by the EBA covers, beyond an error of judgment by the OD, any change of the factual and/or legal basis on which limitations have been made by the proprietor prior to the appeal by the opponent as the sole appellant, provided the proprietor would be prevented by the PRP from adequately defending its patent against new facts and objections introduced into the proceedings at the appeal stage. [2.4.5] Under the circumstances prevailing in the opposition proceedings… [read post]
14 Aug 2013, 2:50 am by John L. Welch
., f/k/a Aquatico of Texas, Inc., Opposition No. 91182064 (August 6, 2013) [precedential].The Board first considered Opposer's contention that Applicant impermissibly amended its original drawing to that shown above, materially altering the mark. [read post]
16 Apr 2019, 4:30 am by David Oscar Markus
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agreed that substantial evidence supported the board’s findings that the FUCT mark is vulgar and was therefore unregistrable under Section 2(a). [read post]
30 May 2023, 2:48 am
In re Seminole Tribe of Florida, Serial No. 87890892 (May 25, 2023) [precedential] (Opinion by Judge Melanye K. [read post]