Search for: "DOES 1-121" Results 621 - 640 of 1,234
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Apr 2015, 9:18 am by Rebecca Tushnet
  Fair use can serve as a gap filler, not trumped by specifics of 108 & 121. [read post]
14 Apr 2015, 7:31 am by Leslie Sammis
Read more about HCPTC rules (Section 7-1) and Chapter 2001-299, for Operating a public vehicle for hire without a certification. [read post]
14 Apr 2015, 7:31 am by Leslie Sammis
Read more about HCPTC rules (Section 7-1) and Chapter 2001-299, for Operating a public vehicle for hire without a certification. [read post]
7 Apr 2015, 11:49 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
The Court’s analysis in Brulotte, however,does not apply to a situation such as this one, in whichCongress, by creating the pediatric exclusivity period,explicitly authorized additional market exclusivity to begranted to the patent owner beyond the life of the patent.In Brulotte, anyone was free to use the patented technologyafter the patent expired. [read post]
25 Mar 2015, 7:23 pm
The will, dated August 1, 1960, was admitted to probate on January 24, 1961. [read post]
10 Mar 2015, 6:52 pm by Kenneth Vercammen Esq. Edison
§ 1.401(a)-20 (1991), which specifically states that “an agreement entered into prior to marriage does not satisfy the applicable consent requirements.... [read post]
8 Mar 2015, 6:06 pm by Kenneth Vercammen Esq. Edison
In this section:(1) “Birth mother” means a woman, other than a gestational carrier under Section 2-121, who gives birth to a child of assisted reproduction. [read post]
6 Mar 2015, 8:50 am by John Day
[1] Note that the fourth condition, found in § 29-26-121(f)(1)(C), was added to the Code in 2013. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 10:00 pm by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.
[1] Note that the fourth condition, found in § 29-26-121(f)(1)(C), was added to the Code in 2013. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 10:00 pm by The Law Offices of John Day, P.C.
[1] Note that the fourth condition, found in § 29-26-121(f)(1)(C), was added to the Code in 2013. [read post]
23 Feb 2015, 3:19 am by Peter Mahler
Mercer offered a two-prong argument for 0% DLOM: (1) application of DLOM in a statutory fair value proceeding effectively constitutes a prohibited minority discount, and (2) the marketability risk was fully reflected in the market exposure period built into the real estate appraisal. [read post]
22 Feb 2015, 4:04 pm by INFORRM
Events 24 February 2015, “Does Privacy Matter? [read post]