Search for: "Doe Parties 1-100"
Results 3401 - 3420
of 5,018
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Feb 2013, 5:01 pm
An intervention of a third party is treated as an opposition and this party is thus granted the status of an opponent, as an exception to the 9-month time limit for filing a notice of opposition A 99(1)). [read post]
20 Feb 2013, 1:47 pm
As such, the lawyer does not give evidence, you do. [read post]
20 Feb 2013, 12:43 pm
” The court says that the message appears personal in question and does not appear to be sent “by means of an ATDS. [read post]
20 Feb 2013, 8:33 am
The plaintiffs asserted claims of: (1) negligence; (2) violations of the Stored Communications Act (SCA); (3) violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA); (3) violations of the Georgia Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act; and (4) implied contract and third party beneficiary breach of contract claims. [read post]
19 Feb 2013, 9:01 pm
Rather than providing guidance for the lower courts to resolve more than 100 such cases pending after remand, Souter’s extensive discussion instead created more areas of dispute between the S & Ls and the government. [read post]
15 Feb 2013, 12:18 am
” The Delhi Police was also fined Rs. 1 lakh for leaking the initial complaint to the media.The facts of the case are simple. [read post]
14 Feb 2013, 5:18 am
They note that protection does not hinge on the literary merit of the work. [read post]
13 Feb 2013, 7:10 pm
Lew is one of those Democrats who is more right of center than the party's base. [read post]
13 Feb 2013, 9:39 am
None of us will get 100 percent of what we want. [read post]
13 Feb 2013, 7:17 am
The Judge can: (1) agree that you need protection and immediately grant the Temporary Injunction Order, (2) rule that your Petition does NOT meet the Florida requirements for an Injunction but will allow a hearing to determine a final ruling or (3) will rule that your Petiton does not meet the Injunction requirements and will NOT grant you a hearing. [read post]
12 Feb 2013, 1:01 pm
Does the Board have the jurisdiction to vary or rescind a tariff going back ten years on the basis that the SCC has now come to a legal conclusion that is arguably 100% inconsistent with that of the Board and the FCA several years earlier, assuming that the factual underpinnings of the earlier decision are extremely similar to those considered by the SCC in the later decision? [read post]
12 Feb 2013, 6:00 am
They are: 1. [read post]
7 Feb 2013, 5:00 am
Party/Case Index. [read post]
3 Feb 2013, 7:45 am
1. [read post]
2 Feb 2013, 3:50 am
He has been in practice for over 11 years and has tried over 100 cases. [read post]
30 Jan 2013, 5:01 pm
The amendment of claim 1, by reintroducing the passage deleted in examination, therefore was clearly occasioned by the ground of opposition of A 100(c), raised by the [opponent] and was – as such – not late filed. [5.8] However, the requests with this claim 1 also comprised a further independent claim (5, respectively 3) resulting from only the features of claim 9 of the patent as granted, which was dependent on claim 1, but without taking up the… [read post]
25 Jan 2013, 9:41 am
” FRCP 13(a)(1)(A). [read post]
25 Jan 2013, 9:41 am
” FRCP 13(a)(1)(A). [read post]
24 Jan 2013, 4:45 pm
It should be noted that the tenancy agreement provided“100. [read post]
24 Jan 2013, 4:45 pm
It should be noted that the tenancy agreement provided“100. [read post]
