Search for: "Does 1 - 37" Results 461 - 480 of 5,341
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 May 2019, 2:55 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
Not only does the FDA’smandate disclose every limitation of claim 1, but it is theonly prior art reference that discloses the 0.001% oxymorphone ABUK limitation. [read post]
17 Jul 2016, 3:48 am by SHG
A man was sleeping in his Palm Coast area home about 1:30 a.m. when a loud noise woke him up. [read post]
18 Sep 2012, 3:47 am by kevin-vonkamecke
ICLEF Law Tips #37 Hallmarks of a Strong Antitrust Compliance Program Last week in Part 1 of  the Antitrust topic we had some valuable input from Judy Woods on why it is important for every company to have an antitrust compliance program. [read post]
2 Jun 2008, 1:33 am
Source: New York Legislative Retrieval System (LRS), Search run on June 1, 2008: Sorted by Chapter Law Number. [read post]
12 Aug 2008, 9:02 pm
Specifically, the changes in 37 CFR 1.78(f)(1) and (f)(2) will only apply to applications filed on or after any new effective date that would be published by the USPTO after the removal of the injunction. [read post]
12 Aug 2020, 11:50 am by Kevin Kaufman
Unlike the Harris plan, Biden’s campaign does not include an income premium to pay for any version of a “Medicare for All” program. [read post]
4 Apr 2007, 8:28 pm
In particular, 37 C.F.R. 1.75(g) provides that "[t]he least restrictive claim should be presented as claim number 1. [read post]
11 Jan 2009, 7:42 am
See Earls, 536 U.S. at 830-32, 836-37; Vernonia, 515 U.S. at 654-56, 661-62. [read post]
11 Sep 2017, 10:53 am by Edward Smith
On Wednesday, September 6, 2017, a motorcycle accident on Highway 37 near the city of Vallejo left a man with fatal injuries. [read post]
14 May 2019, 2:55 am by Jon L. Gelman
As a result, expanding survivor benefits does not provide an avenue for the federal government to revoke the State’s reverse offset status. [read post]
20 Nov 2015, 2:53 am by Jeremy
’Yesterday the Ninth Chamber of the CJEU ruled thus (with the main message in bold):Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29 ... must be interpreted as meaning that a broadcasting organisation does not carry out an act of communication to the public, within the meaning of that provision, when it transmits its programme-carrying signals exclusively to signal distributors without those signals being accessible to the public during, and as a result of that transmission, those… [read post]