Search for: "MATTER OF B T B" Results 621 - 640 of 20,058
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Jan 2012, 9:00 pm
The situation didn't look much better for the GOP in the New Hampshire primary. [read post]
7 Oct 2011, 6:06 am by Robin E. Shea
My fellow employment lawyers, is that Rule 12(b)(6) motion really necessary? [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 5:01 pm by Oliver
The disclaimer of claim 1 (“non-human”) excludes human beings in order to satisfy A 53(a) while the disclaimers of claims 11 and 14 exclude subject-matter which is not patentable under A 53(b) taken in combination with R 28, paragraphs b) and c). [4] The three disclaimers which exclude subject-matter not eligible for patent protection and only serve the purpose of removing specific legal obstacles do not contribute to the invention. [read post]
24 Aug 2023, 5:33 am by Robin E. Kobayashi
If the injured worker does not remember something that is asked about during the deposition, it is acceptable to answer, “I don’t know,” “I don’t recall,” or “I don’t remember. [read post]
29 Mar 2022, 11:50 am by Alexis
Alexis The post Join Me on April 14th for National Healthcare Decisions Day appeared first on The Law Office of Alexis B. [read post]
30 Apr 2008, 2:18 pm
Back in 2006, ATL named him America's hottest law school dean (male, B-bracket). [read post]
20 Mar 2023, 3:30 am by Kollias, P.C.
Well, nobody’s perfect, let alone the court’s professional, or the guardian ad litem for that matter. [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 3:26 pm by PaulKostro
In determining whether 404(b) evidence bears on a material issue, the Court should consider whether the matter was projected by the defense as arguable before trial, raised by the defense at trial, or was one that the defense refused to concede. [read post]
8 Jul 2009, 8:48 am
If no one notices or relies on the statement change does that matter? [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 6:01 pm by Oliver G. Randl
The present board holds that the principles set out in T 1212/97 (affirmed by T 12/01 [20]; T 667/01 [2]) apply to the present case. [5.5] In T 1212/97 [3] the Board did not consider evidence from the lecturer alone as being satisfactory evidence as to what was made available to the public at the lecture. [read post]
10 May 2021, 3:56 am by Peter Mahler
Section 11.01 provides that Forum Capital “shall be dissolved and its affairs wound up upon,” among other events, “[t]he sale, disposition or distribution of all securities and assets held by the Company” or “[t]he election to dissolve the Company made in writing by all the Members. [read post]
28 Mar 2016, 5:01 am by James Edward Maule
Second, several Code provisions, such as section 26(b)(2), 401(k)(8)(D), (m)(7)(A), 414(w)(1)(B), and 877A(g)(6), expressly refer to the section 72(t) additional tax by using the unmodified term “tax”. [read post]
28 Nov 2012, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
(b) The mist generator comprises a mist channelling funnel (Nebelkanaltrichter), and the water level sensor is provided at the height of the bottom edge of the mist channelling funnel(c) The water reservoir comprises a water overflow pipe (Wasserüberlauf) at the height of the water level sensor.As the present main request corresponds to t [read post]
25 Jul 2010, 3:02 pm by Oliver G. Randl
Paragraphs (b) and (c) of that article do not apply in the present case as there is only one party and the Board has not issued a communication. [1.4] In accordance with Article 12(3) RPBA the Board may decide the case in proceedings with only one party at any time after the statement of grounds has been filed, subject to A 113 and A 116. [read post]
26 Apr 2016, 6:30 am by David Whitehead
 “I wouldn’t say we were exactly pushing at an open door” remarked Mr Knowles, but it appeared that the court had been looking for a suitable case to re-examine PAL for some time. [read post]
10 Aug 2018, 5:15 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
If you just want the copy, it might not matter. [read post]
13 Jun 2016, 8:04 am by Rebecca Tushnet
It’s not b/c commercial speech isn’t as valuable, it’s b/c they don’t like the message being sent. [read post]
26 Sep 2013, 5:01 pm by oliver randl
It therefore provides the means to stop applicants, in reply to the first communication, dropping existing claims, replacing them by switching to unsearched and non-unitary subject-matter extracted from the description, i.e., claiming different subject-matter in sequence rather than simultaneously (T 274/03 [4], T 915/03 [3], T 1285/11 [2]). [read post]