Search for: "Don J Smith" Results 541 - 560 of 893
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Sep 2011, 4:00 am by The Editors
“Human rights defenders don’t have an author to orchestrate the whole thing and make it all come out all right,” says Rozan. [read post]
14 Sep 2011, 6:53 am by admin
  (I asked the Boss for ours J. )  Current rates are as follows:   Sewer charges are based on water consumption as determined by your Water Board. [read post]
12 Sep 2011, 3:35 am by Marie Louise
(IP Dragon) China, IP enforcement, trade fairs and trade marks (IPKat)   Ecuador A spicy note for Gandhi’s case – Gandhi trade mark opposition filed in Ecuador (IP tango) (Spicy IP)   Europe G 2/10 – EPO EBoA decides on disclaimers for disclosed embodiments (EPLAW) (IPKat) (Kluwer Patent Blog) J 25/10 – EPO Legal Board of Appeal: Refund of the examination fee after withdrawal of the application, restrictive practice of the EPO overruled (EPLAW) G1/11: an… [read post]
10 Sep 2011, 6:48 pm by Rumpole
"3) J..E...T....S.... hype hype hype. [read post]
28 Aug 2011, 9:02 pm by Dan Ernst
Here is an additional report, relating to criminal case files, which I can make thanks to some communications from Michael J. [read post]
23 Aug 2011, 11:17 pm by Tung Yin
The only thing that makes it different is that Niven & Pournelle have a lot more fun writing in real-life people into Hell: Anna Nicole Smith, Carl Sagan, J. [read post]
23 Aug 2011, 11:49 am by AdamSmith1776
Regular readers of Adam Smith, Esq. should recognize that approach.) [read post]
18 Aug 2011, 6:06 am by admin
  Except insofar as they had chosen to live in the city J. [read post]
5 Aug 2011, 6:44 am by admin
Smith   Pile the houses high in Chillicothe and Chicago. [read post]
1 Aug 2011, 8:23 am by Graeme Hall
Smith & Ors, R. v (Rev 1) [2011] EWCA Crim 1772 (19 July 2011): Court of Appeal: Blanket internet bans for Sexual Offences Prevention Orders always disproportionate; court gives general guidance. [read post]
29 Jul 2011, 5:23 pm by Mandelman
Basically, the high court said that the holder of the Deed of Trust can foreclose, who owns the actual note is essentially irrelevant, and further that assignment by MERS is just fine, absent allegations of fraud… I think that’s most of it anyway… it’s a very technical decision so don’t go basing your plans on what I’ve said about it… check with a lawyer, and maybe even two before doing anything. [read post]