Search for: "John Does, 1-2"
Results 4061 - 4080
of 10,084
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Apr 2008, 5:00 am
If challenging a 1(a) application, think fraud.Text Copyright John L. [read post]
27 Jun 2024, 9:40 am
” The Supreme Court heard oral argument in the case on November 1, 2023, and reversed the Federal Circuit in its June 2024 opinion which upheld the constitutionality of the “names clause” of Section 2(c). [read post]
14 Apr 2023, 4:00 pm
And, sure, read this way, subsection (c)(2) is broad enough to swallow (c)(1) whole and then some (so what’s the point in subsection (c)(1), you might ask), but so what? [read post]
3 Jan 2023, 8:25 am
As applied to transgender students, the policy imposes substantial harm and therefore does not fall within the regulatory carve-out; alternatively, as applied to transgender students, the regulatory carve-out is invalid as beyond the scope of Title IX; in any event, as applied to transgender students, the bathroom policy violates Title IX.(2) How about equal protection? [read post]
30 Nov 2009, 9:53 am
” [2] This article will discuss the history of corporate liability under the ATCA. [read post]
3 Jul 2018, 6:14 pm
The price was John the Baptist’s head on a platter – which was then cut and provided.Thankfully, our legal system does not operate in such a brutal manner, but often when we seek to find the truth about companies, we engage in the Dance of the Seven Veils, often involving smoke and mirrors and often the truth still eludes us.2. [read post]
14 Apr 2012, 11:17 pm
John Does 1-20 are management personnel and/or owners who made relevant decisions in this case with regard to the plaintiff’s transaction as well as the charging of documentary fee on any and all transactions within the past six years. 4. [read post]
9 Jan 2013, 12:00 am
Here is John’s guest post. [read post]
4 Apr 2019, 7:19 pm
The five Supreme Court judges (Lord Reed, Lord Kerr, Lady Black, Lord Briggs and Lord Kitchin) unanimously overturned the 12 February 2018 Court of Appeal decision given by Lady Justice Sharp, Lord Justice McFarlane and Sir John Laws ([2018] EWCA Civ 170). [read post]
3 Oct 2014, 8:25 am
” The district court held that the FAAAA does not preempt section 148B(a)(2). [read post]
31 Jan 2012, 5:31 am
, What Part Does the Oral Argument Play in the Conduct of an Appeal? [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 10:53 am
To hear the relatively new IRS Commissioner, John A. [read post]
23 Dec 2011, 10:27 am
Plaintiff John K. [read post]
15 Aug 2023, 5:01 am
§ 1915(e)(2) because it failed to state a claim. [read post]
2 Jul 2008, 6:43 am
Here is what the prosecution - the State - argued on that issue:The evidence at trial shows that the computers which generated Exhibits 1 and 2 are programmed to automatically log and compile a record of calls made to or from a certain number. [read post]
9 Jun 2020, 8:30 am
Why does it matter to them to prove originalism true if its substance has become so diluted? [read post]
11 Jul 2023, 5:53 am
The Court held that (1) the Rogers test does not apply when the defendant uses the challenged matter as a mark, and (2) the Ninth Circuit’s interpretation of the noncommercial exemption to dilution claims was overbroad. [read post]
5 Mar 2014, 4:05 pm
The main reason for abolition is that the administrative fee overlaps with the additional fees and fees for further processing payable under Rule 51(2) and Article 121(1) EPC. [read post]
5 Mar 2016, 5:45 am
What is determining is whether the new work is transformative, and Prince recognizes this in his motion (p.1). [read post]
23 Oct 2020, 3:29 am
Concluding that Fallon failed to rebut the USPTO's prima facie showing, the Board affirmed the Section 2(e)(1) refusal. [read post]
