Search for: "Does 1 - 29"
Results 4861 - 4880
of 13,848
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Nov 2023, 2:37 pm
By Murphy Yanbing Chen Introduction—Copyright and Creative Commons Licensing Where does creativity come from? [read post]
27 Jan 2011, 2:28 pm
§ 211B.11, subd. 1 provides, in relevant part as follows:Soliciting near polling places. [read post]
3 Feb 2015, 5:47 pm
Fig. 1 is related to a window air conditioner. [read post]
1 Dec 2012, 5:19 pm
80a–3), but for section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of that Act.The end user exemption excludes private funds. [read post]
5 Jan 2017, 3:38 am
, Says TTABPrecedential No. 13: TTAB Dismisses 2(d) Claim but Finds MINIMELTS Merely Descriptive of PharmaceuticalsPrecedential No. 12: TTAB Affirms 2(e)(1) and 2(d) Refusals of HOUSEBOAT BLOB for Inflatable MattressesPrecedential No. 5: Fame of Movie "JAWS" Supports 2(d) Refusal of Cooking Show MarksPrecedential No. 3: Despite Consent Agreement, TTAB Finds TIME TRAVELER BLONDE Confusable With TIME TRAVELER for BeerSection 2(e)(1) - Mere Descriptiveness Precedential No.… [read post]
25 Jan 2014, 8:47 am
American University International Law Review 29 no. 1 (2013): 1-122)). [read post]
13 Sep 2022, 5:00 am
Question 2: Does each claim line in the CRCP need to be dispositioned individually? [read post]
20 Aug 2019, 10:43 am
YouTube’s actions would therefore amount to a communication to the public in the sense of Art. 3(1) of the InfoSoc Directive. [read post]
30 Nov 2017, 11:11 am
X ZR 29/15, GRUR 2016/921 (Eli Lilly v Actavis), paras. 83-85). [read post]
3 Sep 2019, 7:41 am
” Slip Op. at 8, citing the ’453 Patent at column 1, lines 48-53. [read post]
20 May 2018, 2:13 pm
| Google cannot hide behind its algorithms, German court finds | Does the InfoSoc Directive envisage digital exhaustion? [read post]
1 Dec 2012, 5:19 pm
80a–3), but for section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of that Act.The end user exemption excludes private funds. [read post]
29 Oct 2018, 4:15 am
Generally speaking, China’s trade mark law adopts the first-to-file principle, yet it does not explicitly stipulate the regulatory measures to adopt against malicious applications. [read post]
14 Apr 2010, 4:36 am
§ 203(e)(1). [read post]
1 May 2011, 8:25 am
§ 206(a)(1). [read post]
17 Feb 2009, 10:34 am
(2) If the first question is to be answered in the negative: Does an action in the context of the insolvency to set a transaction aside fall within Article 1(2)(b) of Regulation [No 44/2001]? [read post]
5 Dec 2017, 10:36 am
Hulu – valid: Claims 1–3, 23, and 24 not anticipated; Claims 1–6, 8–11, 13–15, 17–20, 23–25, 29–31, 34–36, and 38–41 not obvious. [read post]
17 Jun 2008, 3:42 am
A caseworker took the children from the 29-year-old man's home during an investigation into his relationship with a 16-year-old girl who sometimes baby-sat the children. [read post]
12 Feb 2016, 8:15 am
What does this have to do with the TPP? [read post]
1 May 2018, 1:41 pm
Second, the Court of Appeals in Crump compared the felony disqualification in G.S. 14-51.4(1) to the wording of G.S. 14-51.2(c)(3). [read post]
