Search for: "MATTER OF B G B" Results 21 - 40 of 4,174
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Aug 2018, 9:59 pm by Patent Docs
Noonan -- Earlier this week, Judge Richard G. [read post]
23 Dec 2016, 4:24 am by Nico Cordes
Concerning the alleged knowledge of the skilled person, the appellant provided no supporting evidence.1.2 Function Gij(R',G',B')1.2.1 The function Gij(R',G',B') is used in equation (4) of claim 1. [read post]
1 Feb 2019, 1:13 am by Roel van Woudenberg
The proprietor concluded that, accordingly, since only partial homologous recombination on limited portions of the respective genomes took place, the claimed method was not directed to a process for the production of plants involving sexually crossing the whole genomes of plants as referred to decisions G 2/07 and G 1/08, and that, consequently, decisions G 2/07 and G 1/08 did not apply and the claimed subject-matter did not fall within the exceptions of… [read post]
1 Jan 2017, 8:27 pm by Stephen Bilkis
Jeffery Kaplan, Esq. of Levine & Kaplan for Petitioner Ari Gourvitz, Esq. of Gourvitz and Grourvitz for Respondent The parents jointly sought child custody to the Petitioner mother, and voluntary termination and surrender of the father’s parental rights. [read post]
8 Sep 2023, 9:29 am by Daniel M. Kowalski
Matter of C-G-T- "The respondent testified that he was abused by his father as a child because of his sexual orientation. [read post]
26 Mar 2015, 9:32 am
Not content with clarifying the law on clarity (see here), it has also now emerged from the garden clutching two prize specimens: G 2/12 (Tomatoes II) and G 2/13 (Broccoli II). [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 12:06 pm by PaulKostro
., A-2669-08T2, October 4, 2010: Although nonrefundable retainers are specifically prohibited in Family Court matters, R. 5:3-5(b), there is no such prohibition in other case types. [read post]
11 Apr 2019, 9:15 am by Peggy Cross-Goldenberg
At sentencing, the District Court determined that the two-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. 2A6.2(b)(1)(A) for “violation of a court order of protection” applied because Mr. [read post]
14 Sep 2023, 10:57 am by Daniel M. Kowalski
The BIA determined that Avila’s PSG did not “exist independently” of the harm alleged, as required under Matter of M-E-V-G-113 and Matter of W-G-R-. 114 Matter of M-E-V-G- cites to this Court’s prior precedent in Lukwago v. [read post]
23 Apr 2008, 4:22 pm
After a thorough analasys, the Eleventh Circuit held that § 303(b) were jurisdictional based upon binding precedent in In re All Media Properties, Inc., 646 F.2d 193 (5th Cir. 1981), aff’g 5 B.R. 126 (Bankr. [read post]
1 Oct 2021, 5:59 am by Michael C. Dorf
(b) B&G get a key provision of the Electoral Count Act wrong too. [read post]