Search for: "Does 1 - 37"
Results 41 - 60
of 5,307
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jul 2012, 4:30 am
For example, according to 37 CFR 1.311(b), an authorization to charge the issue fee (37 CFR 1.18) to a deposit account may be filed in an individual application only after the mailing of the notice of allowance. 37 CFR 1.25(b) also makes clear that a general authorization made prior to the mailing of a notice of allowance does not apply to issue fees under 37 CFR 1.18. [read post]
24 Jul 2014, 3:50 am
The post Case Comment: R (Nunn) v Chief Constable of Suffolk Constabulary [2014] UKSC 37 appeared first on UKSCBlog. [read post]
28 Jan 2009, 10:28 pm
I note that the Defendants' Offer to Settle was made under the old Rule 37, but our acceptance of that offer is clearly under the new Rule 37B which does not provide a form for acceptance. [read post]
7 Apr 2017, 10:30 am
The Court therefore concludes that Rule 37(e) does not apply. [read post]
13 Jun 2008, 8:06 pm
What does it take to get a Filing Date? [read post]
16 Feb 2012, 10:11 pm
The Tax Foundation has released a free pdf version of its popular annual book, Facts & Figures 2012: How Does Your State Compare? [read post]
26 Feb 2013, 5:01 pm
See 37 C.F.R. [read post]
2 Feb 2012, 9:03 pm
State, 2012 Ark. 37, 2012 Ark. [read post]
14 Mar 2010, 7:49 pm
Section 37 (1) of the Wills, Estates and Succession Act says:(1) To be valid, a will must be(a) in writing,(b) signed at its end by the will-maker, or the signature at the end must be acknowledged by the will-maker as his or hers, in the presence of 2 or more witnesses present at the same time, and(c) signed by 2 or more of the witnesses in the presence of the will-maker.But section 58 will allow applications to court to cure deficiencies. [read post]
2 Jan 2013, 7:47 am
” 37 C.F.R. [read post]
4 Oct 2013, 12:40 pm
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? [read post]
29 Jan 2011, 10:51 pm
Dungate, (1965) 1 W.L.R. 1577). [read post]
25 Aug 2022, 9:15 am
§ 41.127(a)(1) does not apply to trial and preliminary proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and the PTAB was correct in holding that Petitioner should not be barred from pursuing inter partes review based on interference estoppel. [read post]
25 Aug 2022, 9:15 am
§ 41.127(a)(1) does not apply to trial and preliminary proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and the PTAB was correct in holding that Petitioner should not be barred from pursuing inter partes review based on interference estoppel. [read post]
20 Oct 2011, 7:55 am
APP vigorously disagreed, however, that Section 37 resolved the case, and has argued that Section 37 cannot constitutionally be applied and that Section 37 does not take effect for one year after AIA enactment. [read post]
18 Sep 2013, 9:00 am
Doe, 37, suffered from gestational diabetes. [read post]
17 Oct 2014, 8:33 am
However, construing the Court's general jurisdiction to issue injunctions under section 37(1) of the Supreme Court Act 1981 in the context of Article 11 of the Enforcement Directive (Directive 2004/48/EC on the enforcement of intellectual property rights), and in particular drawing on the decision of the CJEU in L'Oreal v eBay, he concludes "even if the Court would not have power to grant a website blocking injunction in a trade mark case upon a purely domestic… [read post]
31 May 2013, 7:24 am
From a more general perspective, the Court noted that the admissibility or validity of an application for a declaration of invalidity does not depend on the good faith of the applicant. [read post]
16 Aug 2013, 4:29 am
Take Adam & Eve for example: what does it tell you about a law firm? [read post]
24 Jun 2011, 4:25 am
Babilonia, 344 F.3d 37, 41 (1st Cir. 2003)) (emphasis in original). [read post]
