Search for: "C. G., Matter of"
Results 601 - 620
of 3,974
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Feb 2012, 8:28 am
Matter of Estate of Baker, 297 N.J. [read post]
18 Aug 2012, 3:42 pm
Exhibit C is an affidavit from the grandson of the plaintiff. [read post]
16 May 2012, 5:01 pm
In example 24, treatment was carried out at 55°C for 5 minutes 3.9 mmole NaOH/g resin, peak pH 10.3 which resulted in hardly any loss of AZE with a percentage of 41, a percentage ACH of <2 and an undetectable amount of AOX. [read post]
14 Feb 2011, 2:49 am
Magistrate Judge James C. [read post]
31 Oct 2023, 9:05 pm
The Third Circuit also noted that: Were the debtor facing “serious financial and/or managerial difficulties at the time of filing,” the result may have been different.[16] Thus, there are two critical takeaways from LTL Mgmt: (1) a showing of financial distress is a necessity, no matter what the Texas Two-Step (or other statutes) say, and (2) the debtor who shows specific “financial or managerial difficulties” may be able to satisfy this burden. [read post]
5 Feb 2010, 3:36 pm
IN THE MATTER OF I.L., C.L. [read post]
1 Mar 2012, 5:01 pm
The ground for opposition under A 100(c) therefore does not prejudice the maintenance of a European patent which includes such a feature. [read post]
20 Mar 2013, 6:01 pm
Ousset (rapporteur) and C. [read post]
4 Nov 2013, 5:01 pm
The decision was based on the request filed on October 31.The Board of appeal found that the applicant’s right to be heard had been violated:Fundamental deficiencies[3] The appellant contests the decision of the ED essentially for both procedural and substantive matters. [read post]
16 Jun 2010, 3:01 pm
In this case the patent was opposed on the grounds based on A 100(a), (b) and (c). [read post]
15 Jun 2020, 12:00 am
C. [read post]
25 Nov 2012, 1:00 pm
In differing from A-G Jacobs, A-G Sharpston observed that the notice requirement did not have any Treaty basis and was rationalized merely as a procedural requirement. [read post]
15 Jun 2020, 3:00 pm
C. [read post]
8 Oct 2013, 5:01 pm
Prokop, who in 2008 was working for Kennametal Technologies and involved in matters relating to inventions in the Kennametal group. [read post]
13 Feb 2012, 2:15 am
In the matter of Peacock, heard 14 December 2011. [read post]
2 Jan 2015, 10:47 am
Increasingly, the courts have been challenged to resolve complex disputes arising from new uses of works and other subject matter brought about by innovations in technology. [read post]
1 Jul 2020, 10:16 am
C-34, see Practice Note, Canadian Bid-Rigging Law. [read post]
24 Apr 2016, 7:00 am
., 788 F.3d 1371, reh’g en banc denied, 809 F.3d 1282 (Fed. [read post]
10 May 2020, 2:32 am
It is sufficient to recall that, only a few days ago, in its important judgment in Gömböc, C-237/19 [IPKats posts here and here], the CJEU held that each IP right has its own subsistence requirements and the analysis required to determine protection under one right is different from that mandated under other rights. [read post]
27 Mar 2007, 8:51 pm
(C) Conducting targeted counter-terrorism operations [read post]
