Search for: "Does 1-37"
Results 381 - 400
of 5,240
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Dec 2013, 10:55 am
Access Copyright does not comment on what may happen were the Board to conclude that such posting triggers the first right but not the second. [read post]
27 May 2019, 8:56 am
With maximum federal tax rates of 37% and California income taxes of 13.3%, and with no deduction for the attorney’s fees and costs they pay, their combined income taxes should be around $1 billion. [read post]
24 Jul 2008, 8:24 pm
See 15 CFR 734.3(b)(1)(v) and 734.10(b) and 35 U.S.C. 184. [read post]
5 Aug 2012, 8:40 am
Does his answer at the Article 32, UCMJ investigation constitute a prior inconsistent statement under Rule 801(d)(1)(A)? [read post]
26 Sep 2018, 12:47 am
The phrase simply means that the received indications "may be used when calculating the [...] audience of the program" (see description, the paragraph bridging pages 36 and 37).3. [read post]
26 Mar 2015, 8:06 am
Select option #1, then option #1 again when prompted by the USPTO's automated system. [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 8:50 pm
Article 3(k) of the PSD2 specifies that the ‘Directive does not apply to services based on specific payment instruments that can be used only in a limited way, that meet specified conditions. [read post]
20 Apr 2010, 6:30 am
§ 1.63(d)(1)(iii). [read post]
22 May 2023, 12:02 pm
" Motion at 1. [read post]
25 Feb 2021, 2:38 pm
Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U.S. 1, 37 (1937)). [read post]
15 Apr 2024, 2:33 pm
(Proposed 37 CFR 42.75(e)(1)). [read post]
1 Jul 2013, 5:00 am
(¶¶3, 37.)Plaintiffs’ ConvenienceMr. [read post]
23 Oct 2013, 2:38 pm
Slip op. at 37. [read post]
24 May 2022, 3:50 am
How Does Your State Rank on Sales Taxes? [read post]
18 Oct 2020, 3:10 pm
In my calculations I assume that 60% does it. [read post]
6 Dec 2008, 6:31 am
As discussed below, the trial court had the authority to impose the underlying award of attorney's fees pursuant to either Indiana Trial Rule 37 (B) or Indiana Code Section 34-52-1-1(b).Opinion at 11, with footnote omitted.IC 34-52-1-1 is our frivolous claims statute:IC 34-52-1-1 General recovery rule Sec. 1. [read post]
7 May 2018, 6:48 am
§ 401.14(c)(1). [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 9:09 pm
Decided and Entered:June 23, 2022 532161 [*1]In the Matter of Julio Lewis, Appellant, vLetitia James, as Attorney General of the State of New York, Respondent. [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 9:09 pm
Decided and Entered:June 23, 2022 532161 [*1]In the Matter of Julio Lewis, Appellant, vLetitia James, as Attorney General of the State of New York, Respondent. [read post]
15 May 2014, 6:11 am
.): 25 Greenwoods Motion for Summary J + Tribal Appellate Court Decision 27 State Farm Motion for Summary J 27-1 Tribal Court Complaint 27-3 State Farm Tribal Court Motion to Dismiss 37 Greenwood Response 38 State Farm Response 39 State Farm Reply 42 MJ Order An excerpt: In summary, the court concludes that the tribal court does have jurisdiction over the Greenwoods’ claims against State Farm. [read post]
