Search for: "MATTER OF V K"
Results 461 - 480
of 3,675
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Oct 2014, 1:27 pm
Even before the landmark United States v. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 10:42 am
I can now report that neither side in the Access Copyright K-12 tariff matter that was the subject of judicial review by the Federal Court of Appeal ("FCA") has sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 10:42 am
I can now report that neither side in the Access Copyright K-12 tariff matter that was the subject of judicial review by the Federal Court of Appeal ("FCA") has sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. [read post]
21 Feb 2014, 2:24 pm
P. 4(k)(1)(A). [read post]
18 Dec 2013, 8:29 am
Devata and Kendra K. [read post]
23 Jun 2023, 2:16 pm
In San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors v. [read post]
11 Mar 2012, 6:01 pm
The Board found the underlying amendments to violate A 123(3):*** Translation of the German original ***[3.1] The [opponent] criticized the introduction of the feature related to the proportion of active compound in % by weight because the amendment was not occasioned by a ground for opposition under A 100.[3.2] The Board does not share this opinion and considers this amendment to be an attempt to delimit [the subject-matter] with respect to the prior art and, therefore, to overcome the… [read post]
12 Jul 2011, 5:59 pm
By Eric Goldman Tatro v. [read post]
17 Jun 2021, 12:28 pm
From Shuman v. [read post]
6 Aug 2015, 9:28 am
Estate of Kensinger v. [read post]
8 Feb 2008, 5:15 am
We are discussing Portnoy v. [read post]
4 Dec 2012, 11:35 am
In the case of Mullin v. [read post]
27 Apr 2008, 3:21 pm
Or sometimes its just a matter of forum conveniens to plaintiff's counsel. [read post]
28 Aug 2023, 6:35 am
We look forward to serving your needs in this matter and to establishing a mutually satisfactory relationship. [read post]
4 Mar 2009, 9:52 pm
Per Oldfield v. [read post]
29 Aug 2014, 9:28 am
By Courtney K. [read post]
27 Apr 2020, 2:00 am
On Wednesday 29 April 2020, the Supreme Court will hear the appeal of The Advocate General representing the Commissioners of HMRC v K E Entertainments Ltd (Scotland) .This appeal will consider whether the taxpayer (K E Entertainment Ltd)’s claim to a repayment of VAT fell within the scope of the Principal VAT Directive, Articles 73 and 90, together with (if necessary) VAT Regulation 38 (as the taxpayer contends) or within VAT Act section 80 and is therefore… [read post]
19 Mar 2021, 5:40 am
Mansel/K. [read post]
6 Mar 2007, 12:27 am
Ltd. v. [read post]
4 Jan 2017, 5:51 am
It matters a great deal when we’re considering which persons or entities can be liable. [read post]
