Search for: "In RE DP v. State"
Results 41 - 60
of 111
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Apr 2020, 3:44 pm
And though State Sen. [read post]
28 Sep 2018, 8:25 am
It is sufficient that an appearance of partiality is at least arguable in the circumstances of the case (see G 1/05, supra, point 19; R 2/15, supra, point 5 with reference to European Court of Human Rights, Micallef v. [read post]
22 Mar 2019, 4:11 am
They had also provided further evidence showing that document D2 was not state of the art. [read post]
14 Apr 2010, 7:20 am
Penna 9/29/9) Dist court certified a class action re the manner that SEA distributes IDEA funds; King v. [read post]
27 Dec 2016, 12:00 am
The admissibility of the appealIn view of the facts set out at points I, V and VI above, the board finds that the appeal satisfies the admissibility criteria under the EPC and is thus admissible.2. [read post]
19 Jun 2013, 11:03 pm
The TDS terms and conditions specifically state (7.10) that the deposit will remain protected where a statutory periodic tenancy follows a fixed term tenancy. [read post]
10 Jan 2011, 1:01 pm
Clearly the bulk of budget solutions must come in the realm of education and healthcare - we're not going to eliminate the state's criminal justice system, and even if we did it simply wouldn't be enough. [read post]
20 Apr 2016, 8:40 am
But, per capita, we're #10 out of the ten largest states.Bethke said about half of states fully fund indigent defense in the state budget; two-thirds of states fund at least half or more of indigent defense costs. [read post]
24 Mar 2018, 12:12 pm
The US Supreme Court issued a unanimous benchslapping to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Ayestas v. [read post]
24 Mar 2011, 2:15 am
This is what the DPS say on their webs-site FAQ: If deposits are being secured with The DPS they must be for the full amount as stated in the contract (AST). [read post]
16 Jan 2024, 10:42 am
(We're lucky to have José Garza.) [read post]
14 Sep 2010, 5:41 am
Two cases that deserve note are DPS v. [read post]
1 Feb 2022, 12:32 am
The documents filed by the parties in the appeal proceedings are numbered as follows:A1 Decision Edwards Lifesciences AG v. [read post]
27 Feb 2018, 6:16 am
The appellant's arguments, as far as they are relevant to the present decision, may be summarised as follows:The idea behind Rule 71(3) EPC was that an applicant could re-enter the examination proceedings if it did not agree with the proposed claims. [read post]
27 Feb 2018, 6:16 am
The appellant's arguments, as far as they are relevant to the present decision, may be summarised as follows:The idea behind Rule 71(3) EPC was that an applicant could re-enter the examination proceedings if it did not agree with the proposed claims. [read post]
2 Jan 2011, 8:06 pm
CONSERVANCY OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA v. [read post]
15 Aug 2017, 7:48 pm
And, in some cases, it's possible the defense may be who has to end up asking for testing in these circumstances because, normally, the state would do it and DPS is often a trusted actor. [read post]
2 Apr 2012, 7:58 am
One new proposal that’s interesting is in the proxy that Dr Pepper Snapple Group (DPS) filed on March 29. [read post]
23 Nov 2020, 12:45 am
In the present case especially because this step represents exactly the contribution which goes beyond the state of the art. [read post]
24 May 2017, 2:50 am
However, contrary to what was stated in EPO Form 2300.1 ("VII. [read post]
