Search for: "MATTER OF H C R"
Results 341 - 360
of 1,520
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Jan 2011, 2:07 pm
Section 101.93(f) simply restates part of the definition of the types of claims that may be made under section 403(r)(6) of the FD&C Act. [read post]
23 Jul 2009, 5:51 am
King, Susan R. [read post]
16 Aug 2011, 8:54 am
R. 4:86-4(d). [read post]
11 Jun 2019, 12:35 pm
H. [read post]
19 Jan 2017, 8:08 am
Private solutions matter. [read post]
20 Jun 2012, 6:27 am
The author of this blog is Douglas C. [read post]
21 Mar 2013, 7:58 am
Gerald Feichter (Case C 419/11). [read post]
29 Nov 2016, 4:10 am
There is an exception for matters with a idealistic public policy background. [read post]
27 Apr 2013, 10:19 am
It is understandable that the government would include this provision, since young cyberbullies likely do not have any assets of their own (making a civil lawsuit futile) and to perhaps dip into the homeowners or renters insurance policies that parents may have.(3) Where the defendant is a minor, a parent of the defendant is jointly and severally liable for any damages awarded to the plaintiff unless the parent satisfies the Court that the parent was exercising reasonable supervision over the… [read post]
16 Sep 2010, 7:06 pm
Sorry all for not posting in a while. [read post]
28 Dec 2009, 12:02 am
Bills C-46 and C-47 languished, however, and have yet to be discussed at committee. [read post]
21 Dec 2020, 8:27 pm
According to traditional principles the communication should be for the purpose of obtaining a patent (H's Application (1955) 73 RPC 197). [read post]
31 May 2019, 3:15 pm
Working sessions Working sessions K: Grievances Concerning Pure Academic Matters Part 2. [read post]
23 Apr 2014, 12:35 pm
Defense Attorney: Jess R. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 11:22 am
” Deputy Solicitor General Michael R. [read post]
12 Aug 2021, 8:24 am
William R. [read post]
29 Jun 2009, 12:17 am
R v. [read post]
5 Aug 2012, 5:01 pm
The EBA has noted further that “[T]o restrict the application of R 28(c) (formerly R 23d(c)) to what an applicant chooses explicitly to put in his claim would have the undesirable consequence of making avoidance of the patenting prohibition merely a matter of clever and skilful drafting of such claims” (see point [22] of the Reasons). [21] The present Board does not see any reason to apply this approach of decision G 2/06 to the situation… [read post]
28 Jan 2013, 6:45 am
Thank you very much for you[r] assistance. [read post]
