Search for: "MATTER OF C A"
Results 481 - 500
of 36,667
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Feb 2017, 12:00 pm
I would be honored to help you with your matters – large or small. [read post]
16 Oct 2023, 1:06 pm
P. 30(c)(1). [read post]
2 Aug 2018, 3:29 pm
http://bit.ly/2LS8Q31 Leech Tishman represents two petitioners in the matter, Donald Vaughn and the Santa Monica Canyon Civic Association. [read post]
17 Jan 2019, 3:28 pm
Hindman and Tiffany C. [read post]
25 Apr 2015, 4:21 am
Ustian, Robert C. [read post]
8 Nov 2010, 4:01 am
"Juan C. [read post]
28 Mar 2022, 2:17 am
A professional and modern logo, for example, can be created on platforms in a matter of minutes in most cases. [read post]
28 Mar 2022, 2:17 am
A professional and modern logo, for example, can be created on platforms in a matter of minutes in most cases. [read post]
10 Mar 2022, 6:26 am
” In addition,”[i]t does not matter whether control is exercised, so long as the power to control exists. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 1:58 pm
Are the digital lock provisions in C-32 constitutional? [read post]
20 Apr 2010, 5:09 am
The Appellate Division reversed Supreme Court’s ruling, confirming the chief’s action denying Tancredi’s application for §207-c disability benefits “on the merits. [read post]
7 Mar 2016, 2:06 pm
SCoA had held that F/F/C was not required because the Georgia courts lacked subject matter jurisdiction to do a second-parent adoption for an unmarried couple, where the biological parent's rights were not terminated. [read post]
29 Jan 2008, 3:15 am
., No. 07 C 3248, 2007 WL 4294744 (N.D. [read post]
12 Dec 2017, 6:31 pm
Notably, Bill C-65 does not mandate specific sanctions for perpetrators of harassment and violence where such conduct is determined to have occurred. [read post]
15 Feb 2011, 12:33 pm
., A-2688-09T1, February 9, 2011: A motion for reconsideration is governed by Rule 4:49-2 and is a matter to be exercised in the trial court’s sound discretion. [read post]
28 Jun 2022, 7:00 am
It simply isn’t credible to argue that Bill C-18 involves minimal market intervention. [read post]
2 Oct 2015, 3:41 am
Applicant argued that the marks are so dissimilar that, as a matter of law, these two claims must be jettisoned, but the Board disagreed. [read post]
11 Jan 2009, 1:57 pm
In Case C-455/06 Heemskerk BV, Firma Schaap v. [read post]
4 Jul 2010, 2:26 am
39/05 P and C? [read post]
24 Feb 2022, 9:15 am
The examiner rejected on 2(a) and 2(c) grounds, but the TTAB affirmed only on 2(c), so the court doesn’t reach whether 2(a) can cover this kind of disparaging mark. [read post]
