Search for: "MATTER OF B C"
Results 41 - 60
of 15,994
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 May 2024, 5:35 pm
" [Hats off to Jennifer C. [read post]
26 Aug 2016, 5:06 am
Imagine A sends a message to B directing B to contact C and that C does so. [read post]
14 Apr 2014, 10:00 pm
Related posts:CJEU rules on Arts. 22 No 1 and 27(1) Brussels I-Regulation CJEU rules on Art. 15 (1) lit. c) Brussels I-Regulation French Judgment on Article 5 (1) b of the Brussels I Regulation, Part III [read post]
18 May 2012, 5:41 am
The truncated “nominal” claim defining the invention with bracketed elements A, B, C. [read post]
1 May 2018, 10:44 am
Combs, 49 Cal.4th 35 (2010), which held that the IWC Wage Orders embody three alternative definitions of “employ”: “(a) to exercise control over the wages, hours or working conditions, or (b) to suffer or permit to work, or (c) to engage, thereby creating a common law employment relationship. [read post]
23 Jul 2010, 1:09 am
The dispute arose following the sale by B to A of 100% of the share capital in C and the debt owed by C to B. [read post]
29 Aug 2011, 1:34 pm
United States District Judge Margaret B. [read post]
29 Aug 2011, 1:34 pm
United States District Judge Margaret B. [read post]
15 Jun 2022, 3:51 am
This appeal boils down to matters (c) and (d), which concern mitigations and options. [read post]
29 Jun 2018, 8:33 am
(b) Sole Exceptions to Subject Matter Eligibility. [read post]
22 Mar 2013, 11:10 am
[C]ounsel’s conduct in the deposition was objectively reckless and so egregious that it amounted to bad faith." [read post]
28 Feb 2008, 1:43 am
Mayr v Bäckerei und Konditorei Gerhard Flöckner OHG (Case C-506/06): WLR (D) 63 “An employee who was dismissed at a time between the in vitro fertilisation of her ova and the transfer of the fertilised ova to her uterus was not "pregnant" for the purposes of Directive 92/85 on the safety and health at work of pregnant workers, but her dismissal was unlawful under Directive 76/207 on equal treatment for men… [read post]
25 Jul 2013, 10:29 am
B moved to Illinois after the separation while A and C and their other children continued to reside in Indiana. [read post]
29 Mar 2011, 3:24 am
(b) does any act of extraction and/or re-utilisation by that party occur (i) in A only (ii) in B only; or (iii) in both A and B? [read post]
2 Dec 2013, 8:52 am
Put another way: A loans car to B; B, in turn, loans car to C; C, in turn, gets in an accident. [read post]
22 Mar 2022, 4:12 am
In practice, condition No. 1 doesn’t matter that much because most Rule 506(b) offerings are made exclusively to accredited investors in any event. [read post]
28 May 2008, 5:26 am
C. [read post]
7 Jul 2020, 6:04 am
In a significant Hatch-Waxman decision, a Delaware District Court recently denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), rejecting the argument that the conversion of the defendants’ Paragraph IV certifications to Paragraph III certifications deprived the court of subject matter jurisdiction, but granted the defendants’ motion for partial judgment on the pleadings under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). [read post]
20 Nov 2009, 1:06 pm
§ 1240.26(c)(4), Nt. (2009), which took effect on January 20, 2009, and superseded Matter of Diaz-Ruacho, 24 I&N Dec. 47 (BIA 2006), do not apply retroactively. (2) Where an Immigration Judge granted voluntary departure prior to January 20, 2009, and the alien failed to timely post the voluntary departure bond required by section 240B(b)(3)of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. [read post]
21 Feb 2017, 6:52 am
In this opposition appeal the appellant (opponent) argued that the new main request filed during the oral proceedings should not be admitted because its subject-matter should not be considered as a convergent development from the subject-matter of the earlier filed requests. [read post]
