Search for: "1-8 Doe" Results 6341 - 6360 of 32,313
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Dec 2013, 6:48 pm by Chuck Cosson
 It is simply that, at least in the US, it does not appear that there currently exists a basis to enact a comprehensive data security law. [read post]
Case 1: Appeal 2018-007443[8] (Decided October 10, 2019) This case involves the PTAB reversing the Examiner’s Section 101 rejections of claims of the 14/815,940 patent application. [read post]
27 Oct 2014, 3:14 pm
Therefore, the requirement is not jurisdictional and does not affect the filing date. [read post]
26 Jun 2018, 3:32 pm by Peter Margulies
In enacting 8 U.S.C. 1152(a)(1)(A), which bars national-origin discrimination in the issuance of immigrant visas, Congress sought to prevent administrative backsliding toward the discredited quota regime. [read post]
20 May 2024, 12:02 pm by Michael DeRose
And unlike the prior provision discussed, it does not absolutely mandate revocation or denial as a domestic violence conviction does. [read post]
16 Nov 2017, 12:47 pm by Wolfgang Demino
Ch.); In re National Collegiate Student Loan Trusts 2003-1 et al., Case No. 1:16-cv-00341-JFB-SRF (D. [read post]
16 Nov 2017, 12:47 pm by Wolfgang Demino
Ch.); In re National Collegiate Student Loan Trusts 2003-1 et al., Case No. 1:16-cv-00341-JFB-SRF (D. [read post]
17 Aug 2015, 4:15 am by Matrix Legal Information Team
It concluded that art 6(1) does not apply because a prisoner does not possess any private law right to enjoy the company of other prisoners, or any precisely defined entitlement to association as a matter of public law. [read post]
28 May 2020, 12:05 am by Léon Dijkman
It also considered that the mere use of this word does not connote the plant-based nature of the burger. [read post]
1 Jun 2016, 4:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
"Specifically, the Hearing Officer "determin[ed] that [McKay's] workplace injury on April 8, 2008 [was] the cause of his permanent inability to work. [read post]
26 May 2009, 1:42 pm
George found no support for the contention that rights identified in Article I, Section 1 of the state constitution as "inalienable" were somehow insulated from the initiative amendment process, pointing out several past occasions on which the court had upheld amendments modifying rights derived from that part of the constitution. [read post]